State v. Wheeler, 835 N.W.2d 871

On January 15, 2011, around 2:00 a.m., Wheeler and his girlfriend quarrelled in her apartment after heavy drinking.
A neighbor called 911; Wheeler was arrested for domestic disturbance and placed in a patrol car with the camera on.
Wheeler described to the officer the location of marijuana and paraphernalia in the apartment, claiming it belonged to 'that bitch' and not to him.
Officers found a marijuana baggie near the couch and, in the basement bedroom drawer, a large bag of marijuana with five smaller baggies; the drawer contained men’s clothing, and Lewis claimed the clothing was Wheeler’s.
Lewis pleaded guilty to misdemeanor possession and testified against Wheeler; Wheeler and Lewis were indicted for possession with intent to distribute, possession of more than two ounces but less than a half-pound, and possession of drug paraphernalia.
The jury found Wheeler guilty of possession of more than two ounces but less than a half-pound of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia, but not guilty of possession with intent to distribute.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there sufficient evidence of possession?	Wheeler had no exclusive control or dominion over the marijuana.	Accomplice testimony alone is insufficient without corroboration.	Yes; sufficient evidence supports possession.
Does corroboration overcome accomplice testimony for possession by joint occupiers?	Corroboration not required if nexus shown by accomplice testimony.	Corroboration is required when evidence rests on accomplice testimony alone.	Corroboration present via nexus and other circumstances linking Wheeler to marijuana.
Can joint control and knowledge established by location and conduct sustain charges of possession and related offenses?	Joint control and knowledge can support a conviction when there is nexus between defendant and the substance.	Knowledge or control must be proven beyond mere possession of premises.	Yes; Wheeler had knowledge and joint control sufficient to sustain the convictions.

State v. Brim, 2010 S.D. 74 (S.D. 2010) (sufficiency standard in evaluating evidence)
State v. Klaudt, 2009 S.D. 71 (S.D. 2009) (standard for sufficiency of evidence)
State v. Jensen, 2007 S.D. 76 (S.D. 2007) (juror deference to inferences supporting verdict)
State v. Stark, 2011 S.D. 46 (S.D. 2011) (review of sufficiency de novo)
State v. Jucht, 2012 S.D. 66 (S.D. 2012) (law on sufficiency of evidence)
State v. Barry, 2004 S.D. 67 (S.D. 2004) (definition of possession and knowledge)
State v. Goodroad, 442 N.W.2d 246 (S.D. 1989) (possession requires knowledge of presence and character)
State v. Reeves, 209 N.W.2d 18 (Iowa 1973) (joint possession considerations)
State v. Webb, 648 N.W.2d 72 (Iowa 2002) (nexus considerations for possession)
State v. Webb, 648 N.W.2d 72 (Iowa 2002) (nexus considerations for possession)
State v. Talarico, 2003 S.D. 41 (S.D. 2003) (accomplice testimony corroboration standard)