Elliot v. State

Appellant was charged with both possession and sale of a controlled substance (heroin). He was convicted by a jury of possession only. By this appeal, appellant contends that the trial court committed reversible error when it admitted into evidence marked money allegedly paid for heroin purchased from him by an undercover policeman, since that evidence was illegally seized.

Even assuming, arguendo, that the challenged evidence should have been excluded, a point we do not reach, we find that any error in its admission was harmless for two reasons. First, its primary relevance was to the charge…