State of Iowa v. Dennis Carroll Glenn, 20-0389

In Aug. 2019 a deputy stopped a car; Dennis Glenn was the front-seat passenger and a backpack was between his feet. The driver, Desiray Elliott, owned the car.
Deputies removed the backpack after Glenn said it was his personal bag and asked officers not to search it. The backpack contained marijuana in a container/bag and three glass pipes, two with methamphetamine residue. Glenn’s phone, cash, a prescription bottle in his name, and mail addressed to Glenn were also in the bag.
At the booking center Glenn (on recorded video) identified items in the bag, asked officers to retrieve glasses and mail from it, asked that his cousin be allowed to pick up the bag, and admitted, “I had residue in two glass dicks,” and he had marijuana to ease pain.
Glenn was tried by jury, convicted of possession of marijuana and possession of methamphetamine (acquitted on an additional charge), sentenced as an habitual offender, and then Elliott sent a notarized letter claiming the drugs and pipes were hers.
Glenn moved for a new trial based on Elliott’s post-trial letter (newly discovered evidence); the district court denied the motion. Glenn appealed, challenging (1) sufficiency of the evidence for both possession convictions and (2) denial of the new-trial motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for constructive possession (marijuana & meth)	State: evidence (incriminating statements, drugs among Glenn’s personal effects, items in backpack with his mail/prescription, recorded admissions) supports constructive possession	Glenn: State failed to prove he knowingly possessed drugs; items found in backpack accessible to others; proximity insufficient	Affirmed – viewed favorably to State, substantial evidence supports constructive possession based on statements, control over bag, and personal effects in backpack
Whether motion for new trial should be granted based on newly discovered evidence (Elliott’s letter)	State: (at trial) argued strong evidence against Glenn; on appeal State did not press defense claim further	Glenn: Elliott’s notarized letter, written after conviction, claims sole ownership of drugs and pipes and is newly discovered evidence	Denied – court found letter was not likely to change the verdict, and Glenn failed due diligence/prior investigation; district court didn’t abuse discretion
Whether possession of methamphetamine residue is insufficient as a matter of law	State: n/a before court (argument not raised below)	Glenn: for the first time on appeal argued residue cannot support a §124.401(5) conviction	Not reached – issue not preserved for appeal; forfeited by failing to raise in district court

State v. Albright, 925 N.W.2d 144 (Iowa 2019) (standard of review for sufficiency challenges)
State v. Reed, 875 N.W.2d 693 (Iowa 2016) (review standard and viewing evidence in light most favorable to State)
State v. Maxwell, 743 N.W.2d 185 (Iowa 2008) (factors for constructive possession)
State v. Kemp, 688 N.W.2d 785 (Iowa 2004) (vehicle-specific constructive possession considerations)
State v. Smith, 573 N.W.2d 14 (Iowa 1997) (four-part test for new trial based on newly discovered evidence)
State v. Compiano, 154 N.W.2d 845 (Iowa 1967) (due diligence requirement in developing newly discovered evidence claims)
Moon v. State, 911 N.W.2d 137 (Iowa 2018) (availability of exculpatory evidence at retrial does not necessarily require new trial if original evidence remains strong)