Lambert v. State, 2017 Ark. 31

Derrick Gerade Lambert, a convicted felon, was a backseat passenger in a Chevy Tahoe stopped for no rear license plate; police conducted a consent search and found a gun in the backseat armrest.
Lambert denied ownership and said front-seat passenger Alex Harrington placed the gun under the armrest; driver Misty Johnson denied knowledge of the gun.
Michel and Special Agent Carter testified they did not see items passed between occupants, but Carter observed Lambert moving and attempting to exit the vehicle during the stop.
Lambert was convicted by a Drew County jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm and sentenced to four years’ imprisonment; his motion for new trial was denied.
On appeal to the Arkansas Supreme Court, Lambert argued (1) insufficient evidence of possession and (2) Brady violation because the State allegedly released Harrington from subpoena, preventing exculpatory testimony.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to prove possession	State: constructive possession shown by gun found in backseat area immediately accessible to Lambert plus suspicious behavior	Lambert: joint occupancy insufficient; State failed to link him to the gun	Court: Affirmed — substantial evidence supported constructive possession (proximity, exclusive access, and suspicious conduct)
Brady violation for withholding Harrington’s testimony	Lambert: prosecutor released Harrington from subpoena, suppressing exculpatory testimony that neither he nor Lambert had a gun	State: no material suppression that would have changed outcome; Harrington’s potential testimony was cumulative and defense had other testimony	Court: Denial of new trial affirmed — no Brady prejudice shown; no reasonable probability of a different outcome

Airsman v. State, 2014 Ark. 500, 451 S.W.3d 565 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Jones v. State, 355 Ark. 630, 144 S.W.3d 254 (constructive possession may support felon-in-possession conviction)
Cary v. State, 259 Ark. 510, 534 S.W.2d 230 (definition and imputation of constructive possession)
United States v. Roberts, 953 F.2d 351 (8th Cir.) (constructive possession = knowledge plus control)
Garner v. State, 355 Ark. 82, 131 S.W.3d 734 (joint vehicle occupancy insufficient alone to prove possession; additional linking factors required)
Plotts v. State, 297 Ark. 66, 759 S.W.2d 793 (factors: proximity and suspicious behavior help establish possession)
Loggins v. State, 2010 Ark. 414, 372 S.W.3d 785 (suspicious conduct plus proximity indicates possession)
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (prosecution must disclose favorable, material evidence)
Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (materiality standard for Brady: reasonable probability of different outcome)
Murchison v. State, 249 Ark. 861, 462 S.W.2d 853 (analysis of prejudice from suppressed evidence in motion for new trial)