State v. Perry, 222 N.C. App. 813

Police executed a search warrant on June 26, 2009 and found a shotgun in a closet and a pistol in a dresser; defendant was outside in a car and brought inside for questioning.
Defendant claimed the apartment belonged to his parents and that he had never seen the guns there, though he had seen them in the parking lot and others were handling them.
Defendant admitted seeing the pistol a couple days before and that Ra-Ra brought it into the apartment about a week earlier; he said he touched the guns but denied owning them.
Indictments charged two counts of possession of a firearm by a felon (pistol and shotgun), possession of a stolen firearm as to the pistol, and attaining habitual felon status; shotgun possession dismissed at trial, pistol possession and habitual felon status submitted to jury.
Jury convicted defendant of pistol possession and habitual felon status; sentence ranged 60 to 81 months on both convictions; defendant sought a new trial arguing insufficiency and evidentiary issues.
Jury asked for the definition of possession and related criteria; trial court provided the jury instructions, including actual and constructive possession, while the State argued the case rested on constructive possession and instructed the jury accordingly.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the jury instruction on possession and the handling of jury questions was plain error	State argues constructive possession was proper and actual possession was not the focus.	Stroud contends the court failed to adequately address the jury's questions about possession and validity of the constructively instructed theory.	Plain error; new trial granted.

State v. Best, 713 S.E.2d 556 (N.C. App. 2011) (establishes two-element test and sufficiency framework for possession cases)
State v. Alston, 508 S.E.2d 315 (N.C. App. 1998) (defines constructive possession elements and control requirement)
State v. Clark, 583 S.E.2d 680 (N.C. App. 2003) (requires additional incriminating circumstances to support constructive possession)
State v. Marshall, 696 S.E.2d 894 (N.C. App. 2010) (illustrates insufficient linkage between opportunity and control for possession)
State v. Johnson, 693 S.E.2d 145 (N.C. App. 2010) (recognizes substantial evidence standard for accompanying possession instructions)
State v. Tadeja, 664 S.E.2d 402 (N.C. App. 2008) (plain-error standard for jury instruction issues when no objection was made)