Mohamed v. State, 314 Ga. App. 181

Mohamed was convicted of possession of cathinone, a Schedule I substance, under the Georgia Controlled Substances Act.
Two packages delivered to a DHL facility in Clayton County from Kenya were inspected; contents were identified as khat by law enforcement.
Mohamed arrived claiming one package for another person; police found a black bag with plant material in his vehicle.
In September 2009, the state crime lab tested the material and found detectable amounts of cathinone and cathine; the chemist explained cathinone degrades into cathine.
Mohamed testified khat is legal in Somalia and that cathinone effects decline after a few days; shipment took several days to reach Georgia.
The trial court convicted, but the appellate court reversed, holding the evidence insufficient to prove the required intent.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether State provedMohamed knowingly possessed cathinone	State argues Mohamed knew the khat contained cathinone and possessed it knowingly.	Mohamed contends degradation of cathinone and timing negate knowledge of the chemical identity.	Insufficient evidence of knowledge; conviction reversed.
Whether trial court erred by relying on undisclosed expert data	State asserts discovery compliance; exclusion not warranted.	Mohamed argues willful discovery violations warrant exclusion of the report/testimony.	Not reached; court reverses on sufficiency, leaving discovery issue unresolved.

Duvall v. State, 289 Ga. 540 (Ga. 2011) (requires knowledge of the chemical identity for intent to possess a controlled substance)
Serna v. State, 308 Ga.App. 518 (Ga. App. 2011) (knowledge of dangerousness may support intent to possess)
Mohamud, 15 A.3d 80 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2010) (cathinone degrades to cathine; knowledge of chemical identity required)
Arroyo v. State, 309 Ga. App. 494 (Ga. App. 2011) (discussion of sufficiency of evidence and related standards)