Brandon Artis v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 82A05-1608-CR-1747

On April 6, 2016, police responded to a report of suspected drug odors and loud music from a parked black truck.
Officers found Brandon Artis seated in the driver’s seat; two passengers exited and left the scene.
Artis said the truck was not his, that he lacked a driver’s license, and refused consent to search.
Officers saw a Ruger .45 pistol under the driver’s seat; a compatible magazine was in Artis’s right-front jacket pocket.
Artis’s clothing and identification were found inside the truck. He was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon and convicted after a bifurcated trial.
The trial court sentenced Artis to six years; Artis appealed, challenging sufficiency of the evidence that he knowingly or intentionally possessed the firearm.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether sufficient evidence showed Artis knowingly or intentionally possessed the handgun (constructive possession)	The State: proximity of gun to driver, magazine in Artis’s pocket, Artis’s belongings/ID in truck support dominion and control	Artis: State failed to prove he knew of or intended to possess the gun	Affirmed — substantial evidence supported constructive possession and knowledge

McHenry v. State, 820 N.E.2d 124 (Ind. 2005) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Henderson v. State, 715 N.E.2d 833 (Ind. 1999) (distinguishes actual and constructive possession and lists factors showing dominion and control)