Douglas Craig Lemley v. State
2016 WY 65
| Wyo. | 2016Background
- Traffic stop of an SUV after it crossed the centerline; Keene (driver) and Lemley (front passenger) were detained and officers requested consent to search the vehicle from Keene.
- Keene consented; occupants were asked out of the vehicle; a drug dog was not used because of interior clutter and wind, so Deputy Coulter conducted a hand search.
- A backpack on the rear seat contained a wallet and a zipped leather pouch; the pouch held small baggies with morphine pills and a cotton ball containing methamphetamine.
- Keele initially told officers the backpack belonged to Lemley; Lemley confirmed ownership of the pack but denied ownership of the leather pouch and its contents.
- Lemley was arrested, tried, convicted of two felony possession counts (enhanced by prior convictions), and sentenced to concurrent 2–5 year terms; he appealed arguing ineffective assistance (failure to move to suppress), insufficiency of evidence for constructive possession, and error in denying a proposed jury instruction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Lemley) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Ineffective assistance for failing to move to suppress backpack search | Counsel should have moved to suppress because Keene lacked authority to consent and Lemley did not consent | Officers reasonably relied on Keene’s apparent authority to consent; suppression motion would have been denied | Court: No ineffective assistance — search was reasonable under apparent authority doctrine |
| 2. Sufficiency of evidence for constructive possession | No direct evidence Lemley knew the pouch was in his pack; conviction not supported | Circumstantial evidence (ownership of pack, wallet in pack, placement of pack, Keele’s silence) supported inference Lemley knew and controlled the drugs | Court: Evidence sufficient for jury to find constructive possession |
| 3. Denial of proposed additional instruction on constructive possession | Requested instruction clarified elements (dominion/control; knowledge of presence; knowledge it was controlled substance) and should have been given | Existing instructions already explained possession and constructive possession adequately | Court: No abuse of discretion; existing instructions sufficient |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990) (officer’s reasonable belief in third party’s authority to consent can validate warrantless search)
- United States v. Benoit, 713 F.3d 1 (10th Cir. 2013) (apparent authority analysis: objective reasonableness of officer’s belief)
- United States v. Langston, 970 F.2d 692 (10th Cir. 1992) (passenger’s silence while driver consents can support reasonable reliance on driver’s authority)
- Mersereau v. State, 286 P.3d 97 (Wyo. 2012) (standards for evaluating ineffective assistance claims)
- Regan v. State, 350 P.3d 702 (Wyo. 2015) (elements and constructive possession instruction standards)