State v. O'Dell, 330 P.3d 1261

Defendant, a convicted felon, lived at his father’s home; police later found four firearms in a bedroom cabinet.
Wife testified defendant separately handled a Star Eibar 9mm (Dec 2010) and a Bushmaster .223 rifle (summer 2011).
A search warrant execution in June 2011 revealed four guns in the same locked (key present) cabinet: Bushmaster .223, TEC 9, Star Eibar 9mm, Smith & Wesson .357.
Defendant was charged with four counts of felon in possession (ORS 166.270), each count referring to one firearm and covering Dec 1, 2010–June 25, 2011.
Trial court denied defendant’s motions for judgment of acquittal (MJOA) on the two guns he was not seen handling; a jury convicted on all four counts.
At sentencing the trial court refused to merge the four convictions; appeal followed.

Issue	State's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for constructive possession of the two guns defendant was not seen handling	Evidence of access to bedroom, cabinet with locked key, and defendant’s ability to open cabinet supported constructive possession of all guns	Access alone is insufficient; state failed to prove ownership, possession, custody, or control of those two specific guns beyond a reasonable doubt	Denial of MJOAs affirmed — circumstantial evidence permitted a rational jury to find constructive possession of all four firearms (MJOA properly denied)
Whether four convictions must merge under ORS 161.067(3)	Multiple acts (actual handling of two guns at different times and constructive storage) constituted separable acts allowing separate punishments (relies on Bell)	Charging period and evidence support a single continuing act of possession of all four weapons; no sufficient pause to permit renunciation, so convictions should merge (relies on Torres)	Trial court erred — convictions merge into one because possession was a single, continuing act without evidence of distinct acquisition times or pauses; remanded for entry of one conviction and resentencing

State v. Casey, 346 Or. 54 (state may prove constructive as well as actual possession under ORS 166.270)
State v. Normile, 52 Or. App. 33 (constructive possession may be proved by circumstantial evidence)
State v. Bell, 246 Or. App. 12 (separate acquisition/times and locations can support multiple punishable possessions)
State v. Torres, 249 Or. App. 571 (simultaneous, indistinguishable possession of multiple firearms can be merged as single offense)
State v. Cantrell, 223 Or. App. 9 (possession is a continuing criminal act)
State v. Boyd, 271 Or. 558 (possession characterized as a continuing criminal act)
State v. Huffman, 234 Or. App. 177 (explains "sufficient pause" standard under ORS 161.067(3))