State v. Curry

Defendant Eugene Curry was convicted by a jury of illegal possession of a controlled substance. His appeal from that conviction raises the following issues:

1. Was the defendant denied a speedy trial as defined by CrR 3.3?

2. Did the State demonstrate a sufficient “chain of cus tody” to justify the admission of the substance in question into evidence?

3. Was defendant prejudiced by consolidation of counts 1 and 2 of.the information?

4. Did the State produce sufficient evidence to establish that the substances in question were controlled substances proscribed by RCW 69.50.010 et seq.?

We resolve…