Robinson v. State
2016 Ark. App. 240
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Officer stopped Robinson after observing driving over the lane center and onto a grass median; officer smelled marijuana and Robinson produced an Arkansas ID instead of a driver’s license.
- Two small plastic bags of suspected marijuana were found between the driver’s seat and center console; a minor passenger was released.
- Robinson was searched at the detention facility and a plastic bag with 0.3082 grams of cocaine was found in the front coin pocket of his pants.
- Cocaine was submitted to the Arkansas State Crime Laboratory and identified/quantified; the marijuana misdemeanor amount was not sent to the lab per protocol.
- At trial the State called the stop/searching officer, the property/evidence technician, and the forensic chemist; Robinson presented no witnesses and moved for directed verdicts which were denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency: was the cocaine a "useable" amount to support possession? | State: 0.3082 g was weighable, detectable, visible and therefore useable. | Robinson: amount not proved useable; sought purity/effect testimony. | Court: Affirmed — 0.3082 g is weighable, visible, tangible and meets Harbison useable threshold. |
| Sufficiency: did Robinson constructively possess marijuana found in the vehicle? | State: marijuana located wedged next to driver’s seat, officer smelled marijuana, Robinson drove vehicle — supports constructive possession. | Robinson: joint occupancy insufficient; lack of lab ID (not argued on appeal) and no direct proof he exercised control. | Court: Affirmed — additional factors (location by driver’s seat, odor, driver/control) link Robinson to marijuana and support constructive possession. |
Key Cases Cited
- Harbison v. State, 302 Ark. 315, 790 S.W.2d 146 (possession requires a measurable or useable amount)
- Sinks v. State, 44 Ark. App. 1, 864 S.W.2d 879 (very small amounts may be useable if tangible and subject to quantitative analysis)
- Mings v. State, 318 Ark. 201, 884 S.W.2d 596 (joint vehicle occupancy alone insufficient; additional linking factors required)
- Dodson v. State, 88 Ark. App. 380, 199 S.W.3d 115 (possession requires knowledge and exercise of control or dominion)