State v. Evans, 410 S.W.3d 258

Background

In 1976 Evans pled guilty to breaking and entering in Iowa; he later received a Restoration of Citizenship from the Iowa Governor (not a pardon).
Evans lived at a Stanberry, Missouri farmhouse; from May–July 2011 Kathy Libby was an overnight guest.
On July 13, 2011 officers executed a search warrant at Evans’s home and found a green duffel in the kitchen containing four loaded handguns and over 500 rounds of ammunition.
Evans was jailed on an unrelated arrest when the search occurred; he denied recognizing or possessing the guns at trial but had previously admitted knowing one was owned by his ex-wife and that he had seen them in 2009.
Jury convicted Evans on four counts of unlawful possession of a firearm under § 571.070.1(1); he was sentenced as a prior felony offender to concurrent seven-year terms.
On appeal Evans challenged sufficiency of the evidence (possession and knowledge), exclusion of fingerprint-adverse-inference argument, and several prosecutor comments in closing.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency — constructive possession	State: owner had routine/easy access, prior ties to guns, and property division/decree tied guns to Evans	Evans: guest (Libby) had joint control; no direct proof he possessed guns when seized	Court: Evidence sufficient — constructive possession proven by homeownership, access, testimony, dissolution decree and other incriminating circumstances
Sufficiency — knowledge possession unlawful	State: Evans had others buy guns for him and sought expungement to buy a gun shop, showing knowledge he was disqualified	Evans: Restoration of Citizenship might have led him to reasonably believe possession lawful	Held: Court found ample evidence Evans knew possession was unlawful despite Restoration
Exclusion of fingerprint-adverse-inference evidence	Evans: trial court erred in barring argument that absence of fingerprints permits adverse inference	State: precedent forbids drawing adverse inference from prosecution’s failure to present fingerprint evidence	Held: Court rejected Evans’s claim, citing controlling precedent disallowing that adverse-inference argument
Prosecutor remarks in closing	Evans: comments about Colorado gun debate and several factual inferences (warrant timing, who loaded duffel, sheriff background checks) were prejudicial / facts not in evidence	State: remarks were fair argument, permissible inferences, and urging jurors to apply law despite personal views	Held: Overruling objection to Colorado remark was not prejudicial; other remarks were proper reasonable inferences or not preserved for review

Key Cases Cited

State v. Roggenbuck, 387 S.W.3d 376 (Mo. banc) (constructive possession requires access and control over area where contraband found)
State v. Morgan, 366 S.W.3d 565 (Mo. App. E.D.) (lists additional incriminating circumstances supporting constructive possession in joint-control cases)
State v. Schneider, 736 S.W.2d 392 (Mo. banc) (no adverse inference from State’s failure to take/produce fingerprint evidence)
Holmes v. State, 389 S.W.2d 30 (Mo.) (State not required to take defendant’s fingerprints from touched items or account for their absence)
State v. Roberts, 948 S.W.2d 577 (Mo. banc) (prosecutor may urge jury to enforce law and consider societal consequences)
State v. Hougardy, 396 S.W.3d 443 (Mo. App. W.D.) (standard for appellate review of sufficiency challenges)
State v. Wright, 216 S.W.3d 196 (Mo. App. S.D.) (plain-error standard for unobjected-to closing remarks)
State v. Delancy, 258 S.W.3d 110 (Mo. App. E.D.) (State may argue reasonable inferences from evidence)