913 N.W.2d 717
Minn. Ct. App.2018Background
- On April 4, 2016, Hastings police arrested Jeremy Clarin for an unrelated offense, searched their squad car, then placed Clarin in the back seat and transported him to jail.
- After removing Clarin at the jail, the arresting officer found a clear plastic bag with white powder on the back-seat floor near where Clarin’s feet had been.
- Field and laboratory testing confirmed the substance was methamphetamine weighing 23.084 grams.
- The state charged Clarin with second-degree controlled-substance crime under Minn. Stat. § 152.022, subd. 2(a)(1).
- At trial the state presented officer testimony, a BCA lab witness, and a photograph of the baggie on the back-seat floor; the defense presented no evidence.
- The jury convicted and the district court sentenced Clarin to 98 months; Clarin appealed arguing insufficient evidence that his possession was unlawful.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the state must prove the possession was unlawful as an element of second-degree methamphetamine possession | State: unlawfulness is implicit; possession of methamphetamine is always illegal | Clarin: the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that possession was unlawful | The court: ‘‘unlawfully’’ is an element and the state must prove it beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Whether the state produced sufficient evidence that Clarin unlawfully possessed methamphetamine | State: circumstantial evidence (search, discovery, photo, pat-frisk) supports an inference of unlawful possession | Clarin: no direct evidence his possession was unlawful; state failed its burden | The court: circumstantial evidence was sufficient; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hayes, 826 N.W.2d 799 (Minn. 2013) (statutory-interpretation standard for sufficiency questions)
- Dornbusch v. Comm’r of Pub. Safety, 860 N.W.2d 381 (Minn. 2015) (certain methamphetamine formulations have accepted medical uses)
- State v. Struzyk, 869 N.W.2d 280 (Minn. 2015) (state bears burden to prove all elements beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Loving v. State, 891 N.W.2d 638 (Minn. 2017) (standard for painstaking review of sufficiency of the evidence)
- Bernhardt v. State, 684 N.W.2d 465 (Minn. 2004) (distinguishing direct and circumstantial evidence)
- State v. Harris, 895 N.W.2d 592 (Minn. 2017) (definition and role of circumstantial evidence)
- State v. Fox, 868 N.W.2d 206 (Minn. 2015) (two-step analysis for sufficiency when case rests on circumstantial evidence)
- State v. Silvernail, 831 N.W.2d 594 (Minn. 2013) (construe conflicting evidence in favor of the verdict)