Com. v. Wise, Q., Com. v. Wise, Q. No. 1366 EDA 2016

Wise was arrested after a homicide; a firearm linked to the victim’s wounds was recovered on the passenger-floor of an unlocked Buick Enclave parked near the decedent.
The Enclave had keys in the ignition; officers later saw Wise approach the vehicle, claim it as her car, and produce a license in the name "Nicolette Wise."
Wise told police she registered the car in her sister’s name and that the father of her child had taken the car earlier and told her to retrieve it that morning.
Buccal swabs from Wise matched DNA on the firearm’s empty magazine and the vehicle’s gear shift; her DNA was not on the gun’s hammer, trigger, or stock.
At the preliminary hearing the trial court found the Commonwealth failed to establish a prima facie case of constructive possession and dismissed the firearm charges; the Commonwealth’s motion to reinstate was denied and it appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence supported a prima facie case of constructive possession of the firearm	DNA on magazine and gear shift, proximity of vehicle to scene, and Wise’s connection to the car warrant inference she had control of the gun	No proof Wise knew of or had access to the gun; mere presence/ownership of car and DNA on non-firearm parts insufficient	No — appellate court affirmed denial of reinstatement: Commonwealth failed to prove probable cause of possession

Commonwealth v. Huggins, 836 A.2d 862 (Pa. 2003) (defines prima facie case standard at preliminary hearing)
Commonwealth v. Cruz, 21 A.3d 1247 (Pa. Super. 2011) (elements for constructive possession: power to control and intent to exercise control)
Commonwealth v. Townsend, 237 A.2d 192 (Pa. 1968) (constructive possession principles)
Commonwealth v. Carter, 450 A.2d 142 (Pa. Super. 1982) (mere presence in vehicle not sufficient; possessory inference where gun was within defendant’s immediate control)