Polk v. State

I concur in the court’s affirmance of appellant’s conviction on the charge of possession of cocaine with intent to deliver but dissent from the court’s dismissal of the charge of simultaneous possession of drugs and firearms.

The question involved, of course, is whether the evidence is legally sufficient for the case to go to the trier of fact, in this instance the trial judge sitting without a jury. This is a matter of fine drawing, and the question of the sufficiency of the evidence is purely one of law. Another way of putting the question would be whether the State has made a prima facie…