Fancil v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
*703OPINION
BAKER, Judge.
In this case, the defendant admitted to manufacturing methamphetamine (meth) as he led police officers on a tour of the manufacturing operation that he maintained at his residence. The police were unable to recover any amount of meth from the defendant’s residence; but because of the volume of manufacturing materials and empty pseudoephedrine packets found at the residence and defendant’s recent history of purchasing pseudoephed-rine, the State charged defendant with dealing in three or more grams of meth, enough to establish a class A felony.
To prove that the defendant…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Richardson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
- Stevens v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
- Warren v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2000
- Brown v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1998
- Iddings v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Joseph K. Buelna v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2014
- State v. MealorCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2018
- Fancil v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2012
- Jonathan Reiner v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2013
- Ricci Dale Davis, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals · 2015