10 A.3d 431
R.I.2010Background
- July 24, 2003, Portsmouth PD coordinated a controlled cocaine purchase with a cooperating witness (Austin).
- Austin, arrested the day before for drug delivery, wore a listen device and drove under police direction toward Warren for a four-ounce cocaine deal.
- Rodriguez, approached Austin at a Warren parking lot; he discarded a blue bag containing cocaine under Austin's car as officers closed in.
- Rodriguez admitted cocaine in his car and showed a hidden hydraulically-operated compartment revealing more cocaine after Miranda warnings.
- Defendant was charged on Sep. 18, 2003, convicted of possession with intent to deliver and possession of over one ounce of cocaine while operating a motor vehicle, and sentenced to concurrent terms; on appeal, Rule 29 challenge to sufficiency was denied and conviction affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge of the object’s nature | Rodriguez knew of cocaine in blue bag | No evidence he knew cocaine in hidden compartment | Knowledge established; sufficient evidence for guilt |
| Intent to deliver cocaine | Quantity and delivery attempt show intent to deliver | No clear intent beyond possession | Sufficient evidence of intent to deliver; denial of acquittal upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Colbert, 549 A.2d 1021 (R.I. 1988) (knowledge of object required before possession can attach; infer from conduct)
- State v. Kaba, 798 A.2d 383 (R.I. 2002) (proof of knowledge may be shown by acts or declarations)
- State v. Williams, 656 A.2d 975 (R.I. 1995) (intent to deliver may be inferred from amount of drugs)
- State v. Ros, 973 A.2d 1148 (R.I. 2009) (standard for reviewing trial judge’s denial of motion for acquittal)
- State v. Abdullah, 967 A.2d 469 (R.I. 2009) (sufficiency standard for review; whether evidence supports guilt beyond reasonable doubt)