State v. Slighte

¶1 Jason Ronald Slighte appeals his jury conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. He argues that: (1) the trial court should have suppressed the methamphetamine evidence based on Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 129 S. Ct. 1710, 173 L. Ed. 2d 485 (2009), because this evidence was the product of a warrant-less vehicle search incident to the passenger’s arrest; (2) defense counsel provided ineffective assistance; and (3) the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction. Based on our recent decisions in Millan1 and Nyegaard,2 we hold that Slighte failed to…