Lewis Bradley, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec), 71A04-1611-CR-2658

On Aug. 21, 2015, Nicholas Covie observed Lewis Bradley approach him from a red car and say, “Hey man I got that powder. Would you like some of that powder?”; Covie believed Bradley was offering to sell drugs and called police.
Officer Morgan located Bradley leaving in the red vehicle, initiated a traffic stop, and Bradley exited the car and attempted to walk away; he was detained and handcuffed.
A search of the vehicle’s center console revealed a single bag of crack cocaine weighing 5.68 grams; Bradley was the only person seen in the vehicle from the time of the alleged offer until the stop.
Bradley was arrested; a small bag of marijuana was found on his person at the jail.
After a bench trial Bradley was convicted of level 2 felony dealing in cocaine and level 5 felony possession of cocaine (among other counts); the dealing convictions merged at trial and Bradley appeals the dealing and possession convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there sufficient evidence that Bradley knowingly possessed the cocaine?	The State: Bradley had constructive possession — he drove the car, offered “powder,” was alone in the vehicle, attempted to flee, and the cocaine was in the center console near the driver.	Bradley: Evidence did not show actual possession and vehicle was registered to another person; no proof he knew of the cocaine.	Yes. Sufficient evidence of constructive possession based on possession of the vehicle, incriminating statement, attempted flight, proximity of cocaine, and exclusivity at time of discovery.
Do convictions for dealing (greater) and possession (lesser) violate double jeopardy?	The State: Concedes one cannot be separately convicted and sentenced for both when same cocaine supports both offenses.	Bradley: Argues double jeopardy bars both convictions.	Yes. Possession is a lesser-included offense of dealing when supported by the same cocaine; vacate the possession conviction and sentence, affirm dealing conviction.

Harrison v. State, 901 N.E.2d 635 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (standard for sufficiency review and double jeopardy principles regarding greater/lesser offenses)
Gray v. State, 957 N.E.2d 171 (Ind. 2011) (distinction between actual and constructive possession and elements for constructive possession)
Holmes v. State, 785 N.E.2d 658 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (examples of "additional circumstances" supporting constructive possession)
Hardister v. State, 849 N.E.2d 563 (Ind. 2006) (holding that possession is a lesser-included offense of dealing when based on the same cocaine)