State v. Woodard, A-21-284

On March 13, 2020 a probation officer searched Anthony Woodard’s home while Woodard was on post-release supervision; a spare bedroom and the couple’s main bedroom were searched.
A bolt‑action Mauser rifle and rifle ammunition were found in the spare bedroom; Woodard told officers an acquaintance had left the rifle after asking Woodard to refinish it.
Methamphetamine paraphernalia and a 2.84‑gram brown crystalline substance (tested positive for methamphetamine) were found in a dresser in the bedroom Woodard shared with his girlfriend; the girlfriend claimed ownership of the pipes.
A business card bearing Woodard’s name with a white crystalline residue was found in a jewelry box; that residue was not tested. No fingerprints/DNA tied Woodard to the rifle or drugs in the record presented at trial.
Woodard was charged with possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, possession of methamphetamine, and two counts of possession of a stolen firearm; the jury convicted on the firearm‑by‑prohibited‑person and methamphetamine counts and acquitted on the stolen‑firearm counts.
The district court adjudged Woodard a habitual criminal and imposed concurrent 10‑to‑10‑year sentences (with mandatory minimums); Woodard appealed, arguing insufficient evidence of actual or constructive possession.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for possession of a firearm by a prohibited person	State: jail calls and the rifle’s presence in Woodard’s residence, plus his statements about buying guns, establish knowledge and control (constructive possession).	Woodard: no proof of actual possession; acquaintance brought/left the rifle; no fingerprints/DNA tying him to rifle.	Affirmed — evidence sufficient for constructive possession based on location, statements, and jail calls.
Sufficiency of evidence for possession of methamphetamine	State: methamphetamine and paraphernalia found in the bedroom Woodard occupied support dominion/control over the drugs.	Woodard: girlfriend claimed ownership of pipes; no direct link tying him to the 2.84 g methamphetamine.	Affirmed — factfinder could infer constructive possession from shared control of the bedroom and premises.

State v. Figures, 308 Neb. 801 (standard of review for sufficiency of the evidence; appellate deference to factfinder)
State v. Warlick, 308 Neb. 656 (recognizing actual and constructive possession; multiple persons may have constructive possession)
State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716 (elements of possession of a controlled substance)
State v. Jasper, 237 Neb. 754 (definition of firearm possession: knowledge of presence and control)
State v. Long, 8 Neb. App. 353 (constructive possession and control of premises as evidence)
State v. Sherrod, 27 Neb. App. 435 (mere presence insufficient; must affirmatively link defendant to contraband)
State v. Jensen, 238 Neb. 801 (control/dominion over premises can establish constructive possession)