Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Brazzle

Court of Appeals of Kansas

Decided January 12, 2018No. 116649Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAtcheson, J.

I respectfully dissent from that part of the majority opinion finding sufficient evidence to support the conviction of Defendant Anthony Michael Brazzle for possession of oxycodone. The testimony of Riley County Police Officer Andrew Toolin was insufficient to permit a factual finding that beyond a reasonable doubt the pills found in the car were oxycodone or any other controlled substance. For that reason, I would reverse Brazzle's conviction of that crime for insufficient evidence and vacate the concomitant sentence. I otherwise concur in the results the majority reaches on the remaining…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1981
  2. State v. McBroomSupreme Court of Kansas · 2014
  3. State v. BurnisonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1990
  4. People v. HardColorado Court of Appeals · 2014
  5. People v. Mooring, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API