State v. Arnold
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROSS, Judge.
Cassie Arnold appeals from her first-degree drug possession conviction, arguing that the state failed to prove possession and that her trial was unfair because the prosecutor defined “dominion” as “control” in his closing argument when discussing the legal standard for constructive possession. Because uncontroverted evidence exists that Arnold spent the day treating methamphetamine with acetone and hid several baggies of methamphetamine below a table when police arrived, the evidence is sufficient to prove possession, and because “dominion” does mean “control,” we affirm.
FAC…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- State v. RameySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
- Bernhardt v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- State v. AndersenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- State v. TaylorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
- State v. FlorineSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Peters, A., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Mohamed Shaaban Sultan, Relator v. City of St. PaulCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2024