Roura v. State

I respectfully dissent as I am of the opinion that the evidence against Alcibiades Roura was not sufficient to support his conviction.

The evidence against Alcibiades Roura was sparse, at best: He drove up to the gas station; a passenger exited the car he was driving and carried a package inside the station; he was asked to move a car so the undercover officer could park next to the station. Although *53these facts give rise to a suspicion that Alcibiades Roura was involved in the deal, they are consistent with the conduct of an innocent person who may have been “duped” into becoming an unwitting…