Hons v. State, 84-1467
| Decision Date | 26 April 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-1467,84-1467 |
| Citation | 467 So.2d 829,10 Fla. L. Weekly 1070 |
| Parties | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1070 Raymond D. HONS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Richard N. Watts and Philip W. Dann of Philip W. Dann, P.A., St. Petersburg, Florida for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Peggy A. Quince, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
The appellant, Hons, upon a plea of nolo contendere with reservation of the right to appeal, was convicted of possessing and controlling more than twenty grams of marijuana in a setting requiring our reversal. The facts underlying our decision derive from the appellant's motion seeking dismissal of the information and the state's demurrer.
Hons went to the home of Mrs. Francis Larkins to repair the brakes on her car. After completing his work, he went into the house to wash. Hons had in the past been a visitor at the Larkins' home and on this occasion, at approximately 12:00 to 12:30 A.M., he joined in a conversation with James and Scott Larkins. At about that same time a deputy sheriff in the vicinity observed Hons and the two Larkins through a picture window in an illuminated room of the Larkins' house. From a distance of approximately seventy-five feet, the deputy observed Hons and the Larkins passing a cigarette in a manner indicating to him they were smoking marijuana. He smelled the odor of marijuana coming from a window and upon further observation he saw two baggies of leafy substance on a coffee table. The deputy then knocked on the window, summoned Hons and the two Larkins boys to the front door, and then entered the house. He seized the two baggies, which were subsequently found to contain marijuana in excess of twenty grams. Hons and James Larkins denied ownership of the marijuana. Later, at the jail, Scott Larkins admitted that the marijuana was his.
Although the facts before us may suggest a bare possibility that Hons had constructive possession of and control over the marijuana seized by the deputy, they are certainly not sufficient to support a finding of possession and control beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. Taylor v. State, 319 So.2d 114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). Here, no differently from Judge Hobson's observation in Taylor, a case bearing substantial similarity to the one at hand, "[t]he evidence ... is not only subject to the hypothesis of [Hons'] guilt but is also subject to the equally reasonable hypothesis of [h...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Snyder, 92-02265
...v. State, 428 So.2d 250 (Fla.1983). Mere proximity to contraband is not sufficient to establish dominion and control. Hons v. State, 467 So.2d 829 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Although Parker had offered to let Snyder try some of the methamphetamine, there was no evidence or factual assertions in th......
-
Green v. State, 93-02914
...ultimate existence of constructive possession. See State v. Snyder, 635 So.2d 1057, 1058 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Accord Hons v. State, 467 So.2d 829, 830 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We have also carefully considered the probative value of the odor emanating from the car, a fact which the trial court em......
-
Agee v. State, 86-3231
...were others on the motel premises. Diaz, 467 So.2d at 1062. There was no evidence that Agee touched the match box. See Hons v. State, 467 So.2d 829 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Finally, evidence that Agee fled from the police is insufficient to prove guilt. Kuhn, 439 So.2d at 294; see also Miller v.......
-
Williams v. State, 89-2488
...Diaz [v. State, 467 So.2d 1061, 1062 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) ]. There was no evidence that Agee touched the match box. See Hons v. State, 467 So.2d 829 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).... We hold that Agee's proximity to the heroin and his flight from the police were insufficient circumstantial evidence to e......