Richard v. State

• Court: Arkansas Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: STEPHANIE POTTER BARRETT, Judge
• Citation: Richard v. State, 2021 Ark. App. 25, 615 S.W.3d 759 (Ark. App. 2021)
• Decision Date: 20 January 2021
• Docket Number: No. CR-20-256,CR-20-256
• Parties: Robin Miller RICHARD, Appellant v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee

2021 Ark. App. 25

615 S.W.3d 759

Robin Miller RICHARD, Appellant

v.STATE of Arkansas, Appellee

No. CR-20-256

Court of Appeals of Arkansas, DIVISION IV.

Opinion Delivered: January 20, 2021

Robert M. "Robby" Golden, for appellant.

Leslie Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: David L. Eanes, Jr., Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.

STEPHANIE POTTER BARRETT, Judge

Robin Richard was convicted by the Lonoke County Circuit Court of possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) and possession of drug paraphernalia.¹ She was sentenced to six months in the Arkansas Department of Community Correction for each offense, with the sentences to run concurrently. On appeal, Ms. Richard argues the evidence was insufficient to support her convictions. We affirm.

At a bench trial, Ms. Richard moved to dismiss the charges arguing that the evidence was insufficient to prove she possessed the methamphetamine and the drug paraphernalia. The circuit court denied Ms. Richard's motion and found her guilty of possession of methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia.

An appeal from the denial of a motion to dismiss at a bench trial is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. Baltimore v. State , 2017 Ark. App. 622, 535 S.W.3d 286. In reviewing challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence, this court determines whether the verdict is supported by substantial evidence, either direct or circumstantial. Id. Substantial evidence is evidence forceful enough to compel a conclusion one way or the other beyond suspicion or conjecture. Id. In making this determination, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, with only evidence supporting the verdict being considered. Id. This court does not weigh the evidence presented at trial nor does it assess the credibility of the witnesses as those are matters for the trier of fact, who is free to believe all or part of any witness's testimony and may resolve questions of conflicting testimony and inconsistent evidence. Nelson v. State , 2018 Ark. App. 454, 558 S.W.3d 894.

A person who possesses less than two grams of methamphetamine, including an adulterant or diluent, is guilty of a Class D felony. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-419(b)(1)(A) (Repl. 2016). A person who possesses drug paraphernalia with the purpose to use the drug paraphernalia to inject, ingest, inhale, or otherwise introduce into the human body a controlled substance is guilty of a Class D felony if the controlled substance is methamphetamine. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-443(a)(2) (Supp. 2019).

When possession of contraband is an element of the offense, the State is not required to prove literal physical possession—constructive possession is sufficient. Knauls v. State , 2020 Ark. App. 48, 593 S.W.3d 58. Constructive possession is established by proving the defendant exercised care, control, and management over the contraband. Id. Constructive possession may be implied when the contraband is in the joint control of the defendant and another person. Id. Joint occupancy alone, however, is not sufficient to establish possession or joint possession; there must be some additional factor linking the accused to the contraband. Id. In joint-occupancy cases, the State must prove two additional elements: (1) the accused exercised care, control, and management over the contraband, and (2) the accused knew the matter possessed was contraband. Id. A defendant's control over, and knowledge of, the contraband can be inferred from the circumstances, such as the proximity of the contraband to the accused, the fact that it is in plain view, the ownership of the property where the contraband is found, and the accused's suspicious behavior. Id.

On September 16, 2018, Lonoke police officers responded to a disturbance call at Ms. Richard's house. On arrival, both Ms. Richard and her daughter, Madison Miller, were found in the front yard of the home and were arrested for third-degree domestic battery and taken into custody. At the police department, Ms. Miller was given a personal recognizance bond and released. Ms. Richard, having previously been convicted of domestic battery in 2017, was being held until her first appearance when she would be given a bond. Officer Johnathan Love testified that when Ms. Richard learned she would not be released, she requested that officers retrieve her medication from her house, explaining it would be in a black bag in her bedroom on her bed. Officer Robert Grady testified that after Ms. Miller was released, he escorted her back to the residence to collect her belongings and her car and that Ms. Richard's father, Bill Miller, also went to the residence. Officer Grady watched Ms. Miller enter a bedroom, retrieve some belongings, and leave without entering any other rooms. While at the residence, Officer Grady received a phone call asking him to retrieve medication belonging to Ms. Richard that could be found in a black bag in her bedroom. He relayed the...