State v. Bowling, 2014 Ohio 1690

Appellant Pamela Bowling was charged with one count of illegal assembly or possession of chemicals to manufacture drugs (R.C. 2925.041) after officers found unopened packages of pseudoephedrine, a bottle of lye drain cleaner, and lithium batteries in her vehicle following a Menards employee’s report and a traffic stop.
Menards employee observed another passenger purchase lye and a different customer seeking lithium batteries; store policy and surveillance flagged the activity.
Officers stopped the vehicle shortly after it left the store; Bowling consented to a vehicle search that recovered the items and a Walgreens receipt for pseudoephedrine.
Co-defendant Kelsey Miller (an admitted meth user) testified she and Bowling had purchased items to make meth and that purchases were “for meth”; Miller also said she had seen meth being made.
A BURN Unit sergeant testified the recovered items are commonly used to manufacture methamphetamine.
Jury convicted Bowling; trial court sentenced her to nine months’ prison and other penalties. Bowling appealed raising evidentiary, ineffective assistance, and sufficiency claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of narcotics-opinion testimony by sergeant	Testimony admissible based on officer’s training/experience	Testimony improper absent chemical testing of package contents	Admissible; even if error, not plain error given other evidence
Trial counsel ineffective for not objecting to Miller’s lay-opinion	No ineffective assistance; Miller’s testimony was admissible and counsel cross-examined her	Counsel should have objected to Miller’s competence to ID items	No ineffective assistance; Miller had firsthand experience to opine
Sufficiency: identity of chemicals	State may prove identity by circumstantial evidence and lay opinion	State failed to prove packages actually contained listed chemicals	Sufficient evidence (circumstantial + witness testimony) to identify items
Sufficiency: possession/intent	Items in appellant’s vehicle, text messages, admissions and co-defendant testimony support knowledge/constructive possession and intent	Appellant claimed she only gave rides and did not know about or control the items	Evidence supports constructive possession and knowledge; conviction affirmed

Lang v. Ohio, 129 Ohio St.3d 512 (review standard for plain error in criminal cases)
McKee v. State, 91 Ohio St.3d 292 (lay witness with experience may opine on drug identity if foundation laid)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (standard for sufficiency review)
United States v. Schrock, 855 F.2d 327 (government may establish drug identity through cumulative circumstantial evidence)
State v. Ferguson, 5 Ohio St.3d 160 (harmless-error/indicia that error did not contribute to conviction)
State v. Gragg, 173 Ohio App.3d 270 (police lay opinions admissible based on experience/training)
State v. Blankenburg, 197 Ohio App.3d 201 (plain-error standard described)