Legal Opinion

State v. Shumaker

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided December 27, 2007No. 25860-2-IIIPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 — To prove constructive possession of drugs, the State must show dominion and control over the drugs. Dominion and control over the premises where drugs are found is one circumstance to be considered by the trier of fact. Dominion and control of the premises does not, however, create an inference that the defendant had dominion and control over the drugs found on the premises. To the extent we held otherwise in State v. Ponce,1 2we overrule that holding and conclude that we were correct in State v. Olivarez.2 We then reverse the conviction here for possession of marijuana with intent to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hizey v. CarpenterWashington Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State v. HuffCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1992
  3. State v. CantabranaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1996
  4. State v. PortreyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  5. State v. CubleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State Of Washington v. James H. ListoeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020
  2. State Of Washington v. Chelsea K. HayesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  3. State Of Washington v. Colin MccurdyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  4. State Of Washington v. David Marc LoiselleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  5. State Of Washington v. Earnest RothCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019

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

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

Powered by the Exa API