838 S.E.2d 66
Va. Ct. App.2020Background
- In January 2016 police stopped Yerling for speeding; he was the sole occupant and pulled over immediately.
- Officers detected a faint odor of marijuana and described Yerling as nervous; Officer Murden searched the car.
- In the center console officers found a small baggie of marijuana and, inside a balled-up sheet of notebook paper, a pink pill marked “K-56.”
- The pill was sent to the lab and identified as oxycodone (Schedule II); there was no testimony about car ownership, how long Yerling had been driving, or any furtive movements or incriminating statements by Yerling.
- Yerling moved to strike at the close of the Commonwealth’s case, arguing insufficient evidence he knew of the pill’s presence or character; the trial court denied the motion and convicted him of possession of oxycodone.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the Commonwealth presented insufficient evidence of Yerling’s knowledge of either the presence or nature of the pill, and dismissed the indictment.
Issues
| Issue | Commonwealth's Argument | Yerling's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove Yerling knew the presence and character of the oxycodone | Odor of marijuana and co-location of marijuana and pill in console permit an inference Yerling knew drugs were present | Proximity and occupancy alone are insufficient; no statements, furtive acts, ownership, or visible drug indicative of nature | Reversed: proximity and occupancy alone insufficient; no evidence Yerling knew presence or character of pill |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Jones v. Commonwealth, 17 Va. App. 572 (possession requires awareness of presence and character)
- Drew v. Commonwealth, 230 Va. 471 (mere proximity to a drug insufficient to prove dominion and control)
- Coward v. Commonwealth, 48 Va. App. 653 (reversing conviction where only proximity and occupancy supported knowledge)
- Young v. Commonwealth, 275 Va. 587 (defendant must have knowledge of the drug’s nature; lab testing required where nature not apparent)
- Walton v. Commonwealth, 255 Va. 422 (constructive possession may substitute for actual possession)