State v. Blackshear, 2011 Ohio 1806

Nigel Blackshear was convicted of drug trafficking, drug possession, and possessing criminal tools; the convictions were reversed and the sentence vacated.
On Jan. 12, 2010, Cleveland narcotics detectives investigated a suspicious FedEx package from Las Vegas at a FedEx facility in Bedford Heights.
K-9 alerted to the package; a warrant led to seizure of 3669.2 grams of marijuana and installation of a monitoring device; an anticipatory warrant for the Helmsdale address was obtained.
Detective Bovenzi conducted a controlled delivery to the Helmsdale residence; Blackshear answered the door, accepted, and signed for the package.
Blackshear claimed he did not know the package’s contents and testified he believed the delivery was for his father; evidence included a small scale with marijuana residue at the house.
A search of the home revealed drug-related paraphernalia; the jury found Blackshear guilty of trafficking, possession, and possessing criminal tools; the court merged trafficking and possession and sentenced concurrently to two years.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the evidence supports possession/trafficking beyond a reasonable doubt	State argues evidence shows knowledge or deliberate ignorance supports conviction	Blackshear contends there was no actual knowledge; no deliberate blindness	Sustained; insufficient evidence of knowledge
Whether Rule 29 dismissal should have been granted	State asserts sufficient evidence supports convictions	Blackshear asserts errors warrant dismissal	Moot; convictions reversed and charges vacated

Jenks v. State, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (standard for sufficiency review)
Thompkins v. State, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (manifest weight review; thirteenth juror)
Haynes v. State, 25 Ohio St.2d 264 (Ohio 1971) (possession considerations where narcotics on jointly occupied premises)
U.S. v. Rada-Solano, 625 F.2d 577 (5th Cir. 1980) (deliberate avoidance of positive knowledge doctrine)