WILLIAM GRIFFIN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
William Griffin appealed two drug possession convictions arising from separate marijuana raids in Longwood and Sanford, Florida. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed one conviction for insufficient evidence of possession but affirmed the other conviction where evidence supported the required element of knowledge and possession.
The court reversed the conviction in Information No. 3595 for insufficient evidence of possession under the rationale of Frank v. State, but affirmed the conviction in Information No. 3594 where evidence provided a reasonable basis for inferring that Griffin knew of the presence of the drugs.
[1] Evidence is insufficient to support a conviction for possession of marijuana when it does not establish exclusive or constructive possession of the drugs.
[2] A judgment of conviction for possession of marijuana will be affirmed if the evidence presented forms a reasonable basis for the inference that the defendant knew of the…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“under the rationale of Frank v. State, Fla.App.1967, 199 So. 2d 117, the evidence was insufficient to support the judgment of conviction in Information No. 3S9S”
The court's basis for reversing one conviction due to insufficient evidence of the possession element.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTwo informations charged Griffin with possession of marijuana resulting from separate raids: one at a house in Longwood, Florida (Information No. 3595…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Exclusive Possession cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from two judgments of conviction and sentences thereon for possession of marijuana.
Two separate informations were filed charging defendant with (1) possession of marijuana as a result of a raid made on a house in Longwood, Florida, (2) possession of marijuana as a result of a raid made on a business establishment in Sanford, Florida. Both informations were consolidated for trial. We have examined the record with particular reference to defendant’s allegation that the evidence was insufficient to support the requisite element of exclusive or constructive possession of the drugs in question and are of the opinion that under the rationale of Frank v. State, Fla.App.1967, 199 So.2d 117, the evidence was insufficient to support the judgment of conviction in Information No. 3S9S. Accordingly, the judgment and sentence in Information No. 3595 is hereby reversed. Langdon v. State, Fla.App.1970, 235 So.2d 321; Brown v. State, Fla.App. 1970, 240 So.2d 507; Markman v. State, Fla.App.1968, 210 So.2d 486; Kirtley v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 245 So.2d 282; Torres v. State, Fla.App.1971, 253 So.2d 450; and Arant v. State, Fla.App.1972, 256 So.2d 515.
However, with respect to defendant’s judgment of conviction in Information No. 3594, the evidence presented formed a reasonable basis for the inference that defendant knew of the presence of the drugs. See Medlin v. State, Fourth District Court of Appeal, 279 So.2d 41, opinion filed June 6, 1973; cf. Smith v. State, Supreme Court of Florida, 279 So.2d 27, opinion filed June 6, 1973. Accordingly, the judgment and conviction of sentence in Information No. 3594 is affirmed.
We have considered appellant’s other points on appeal and find them to be without substantial merit.
Reversed, in part; affirmed, in part.
REED, CROSS and MAGER, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Frank v. State, 199 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)
- Arant v. State, 256 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)
- Ira Dennis Markman v. State, 210 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Smith v. State, 279 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1973)
- Langdon v. State, 235 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)
- Medlin v. State, 279 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973)
- McKEE v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co., 245 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Torres v. State, 253 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Brown v. State, 240 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970)