State v. Hudson
2017 Ohio 615
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Appellant Anthony J. Hudson appeals a conviction for possession of cocaine under R.C. 2925.11(A) and (C)(4)(e).
- The home where drugs were found was searched by a TAG task force; Michael Hudson and Anthony Hudson resided there; a padlocked bedroom contained cocaine and other drug-related items.
- A pawn receipt, residential lease listing Anthony, Anthony’s Ohio ID, and other documents with Anthony’s name were found in the padlocked bedroom.
- Crack cocaine weighing 28.97 grams (in 2014) was found in the locked bedroom; the cocaine’s weight was determined by a chemist but not purity.
- Anthony drove past the home and was stopped for a suspended license; a key to the locked bedroom was recovered from him, not from Michael.
- The court later held that the state failed to prove the weight of pure cocaine in the mixture, requiring resentencing under Gonzales.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the weight of pure cocaine was proven | Hudson argues weight of pure cocaine not proven; violates statute. | Hudson argues mixture weight should count as cocaine for penalty. | Remanded; weight of pure cocaine not established; sentence to be reduced. |
| Whether the evidence supports possession given shared residence | State contends constructive possession via key, location, and drug evidence in Hudson's room. | Evidence insufficient to show Hudson knew or controlled drugs. | Sufficient evidence; constructive possession supported. |
| Whether the conviction is against the weight of the evidence | State asserts evidence supports guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. | Evidence not sufficient or credible to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. | Not against the manifest weight; evidence adequate. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Gonzales, 2016-Ohio-8319 (Ohio) (clarifies weight of actual cocaine must meet threshold for 2925.11(C)(4)(b)-(f))
- State v. Swalley, 2011-Ohio-2092 (11th Dist. Ashtabula) (insufficient evidence where drugs in shared areas with no link to defendant)
- State v. Jackson, 2003-Ohio-5863 (11th Dist. Ashtabula) (constructive possession supported by residence and access to room)
- State v. Hankerson, 70 Ohio St.2d 87 (1982) (circumstantial proof required to establish knowledge of presence of drugs)
- State v. Kingsland, 2008-Ohio-4148 (Ohio App.3d) (constructive possession requires dominion/control and consciousness of presence)