State v. Saldivar, A-16-1231

On March 27, 2016 police responded to a disturbance outside a residence rented by Shaurice Saldivar and her boyfriend; only the two were in the yard when officers arrived.
Officers observed the boyfriend hand a beer can to Saldivar; Sergeant Pinet saw a small plastic baggie fall from behind the can onto the ground.
Pinet shone a flashlight on the baggie, believed it contained drugs, entered the yard, and when Saldivar stepped forward and yelled at him he secured her while retrieving the baggie; its contents tested positive for cocaine.
Saldivar testified she was intoxicated, denied knowledge or possession of the baggie, and denied seeing anything fall; her boyfriend admitted finding the baggie earlier and later pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine.
A jury convicted Saldivar of possession of a controlled substance (cocaine); she appealed claiming insufficient evidence of possession. The conviction and sentence of probation were affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to prove constructive possession of cocaine	Saldivar: evidence insufficient — she did not know of or touch the baggie; mere presence at the scene is not enough	State: circumstantial facts (residence control, baggie fell when boyfriend passed beer, Saldivar’s reaction when flashlight revealed baggie) affirmatively link her to the baggie	Court: Affirmed — viewing evidence favorably to State, jury could infer Saldivar knew of the baggie and exercised dominion/control over it

State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716, 890 N.W.2d 178 (2017) (definition of possession and constructive/actual possession principles)
State v. Jedlicka, 297 Neb. 276, 900 N.W.2d 454 (2017) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence in criminal cases)
State v. Jones, 296 Neb. 494, 894 N.W.2d 303 (2017) (standard for appellate review of criminal convictions)
State v. Jensen, 238 Neb. 801, 472 N.W.2d 423 (1991) (control of premises can establish constructive possession)
State v. Lonnecker, 237 Neb. 207, 465 N.W.2d 737 (1991) (actions during police encounter may indicate conscious guilt and control)
State v. Howard, 282 Neb. 352, 803 N.W.2d 450 (2011) (mere presence where drugs are found is insufficient to establish possession)
State v. Draganescu, 276 Neb. 448, 755 N.W.2d 57 (2008) (possession analyses for vehicle occupants)
State v. Britt, 200 Neb. 601, 264 N.W.2d 670 (1978) (constructive possession in residence context)
State v. Klutts, 204 Neb. 616, 284 N.W.2d 415 (1979) (insufficient evidence of control where connection to premises was minimal)