Legal Opinion

Fancil v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided April 5, 2012No. 20A01-1107-CR-339PublishedCited by 5 opinions

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

  1. Richardson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Stevens v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Warren v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Brown v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Iddings v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Joseph K. Buelna v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2014
  2. State v. MealorCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2018
  3. Fancil v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2012
  4. Jonathan Reiner v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Ricci Dale Davis, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API