Dylan R. Smart v. State of Indiana
2015 Ind. App. LEXIS 546
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Smart, King, and Perry used drugs in a vehicle on April 18–19, 2014; syringes with brown fluid were found in the vehicle.
- A field test by Sergeant Janes indicated methamphetamine or MDMA in one syringe.
- Smart admitted prior drug use and methamphetamine injection; track marks were observed.
- The laboratory could not analyze the samples due to contamination with bodily fluids.
- The trial court convicted Smart of possession of methamphetamine and unlawful possession of a syringe, then this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of field test results | Smart argues improper foundation for the field test | State contends test is valid but not conclusive | Harmless error; evidence supported conviction apart from field test |
| Sufficiency of evidence for possession of methamphetamine | State relied on circumstantial proof | Evidence insufficient without field test | Evidence sufficient; witnesses and conduct showed possession |
| Unlawful possession of a syringe | State must show methamphetamine as a Legend Drug | Statute ambiguous; syringes not tied to legend drug | Insufficient evidence; State failed to connect substance to Legend Drug Act |
Key Cases Cited
- Vorm v. State, 570 N.E.2d 109 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991) (presence of metabolites not prima facie evidence of possession)
- Helton v. State, 907 N.E.2d 1020 (Ind. 2009) (state may prove possession through testimony and circumstantial evidence)
- Bookwalter v. State, 22 N.E.3d 735 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (statutory ambiguity; issue of syringe possession under Legend Drug Act)
- Reemer v. State, 835 N.E.2d 1005 (Ind. 2005) (possession of precursor to methamphetamine; scientific definitions not controlling)
- Wilson v. State, 765 N.E.2d 1265 (Ind. 2002) (standard for reviewing evidentiary decisions as abuse of discretion)