State v. McGee
| Decision Date | 13 December 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 56422,No. 2,56422,2 |
| Citation | 473 S.W.2d 686 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. James A. McGEE, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., G. Michael O'Neal, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Donald L. Mason, Raymond, West, Mason & Shy, Kansas City, for appellant.
BARRETT, Commissioner.
In October 1970 James McGee, upon a charge of possession of marijuana, Cannabis Sativa (RSMo 1969, §§ 195.010, 195.020, V.A.M.S.), waived jury trial, was found guilty by the court and sentenced to six months' imprisonment. RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S. § 195.200. Upon this direct appeal the meritorious and determinative question is whether the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of guilt.
Admittedly, there was no proof of actual, physical possession of marijuana by the appellant McGee and the problem is whether the circumstantial evidence and its reasonable inferences permit a finding of constructive possession and hence a finding of guilt within the meaning of the statutes. State v. Young, Mo., 427 S.W.2d 510. This, in brief, was the state's proof: On October 10, 1970, the sheriff of Platte County and his deputies had a house just west of Highway 71 on 115th Street under surveillance, they were attracted to the premises by the number of people entering and leaving the residence at that location. Based on what they had seen and heard the officers secured a warrant authorizing them to make a search of the house and seize marijuana and any 'apparatus for use of narcotic drugs.' Just prior to the search, about 9:30 or 10:00 o'clock, the officers had looked through a large 'picture window' and saw 6, 7 or 8 young men and women sitting around a large circular table--among others at the table was James McGee. As the officers entered the house '(e) veryone (including McGee) faded away from the table'--pushed their chairs back towards the wall. The officers took photographs of the interior of the house and particularly of the table and then proceeded to seize certain items from the table. The items seized from the table were a 'brown leather pouch,' an aluminum carton for millimeter film and a 'pill bottle'--all or some of these contained a leafy material later described as marijuana. There was also a 'plastic container' and in it there were several 'roaches'--the butts of marijuana cigarettes. There was a wine bottle on the table, five 'coke' bottles and other objects as well as books and papers but these were not seized or offered in evidence by the state. The appellant's person was searched and no marijuana or any narcotic paraphernalia was found on his person. McGee occupied the southwest bedroom but marijuana was not found in that room or in his possessions. McGee made no statement to the officers during or immediately following the search and seizure. In a northwest bedroom occupied by one of McGee's friends, Gins, some marijuana was found. One of the officers said that a day or so after the search he told McGee that he had searched the southwest bedroom and McGee asked 'if I found any marijuana or anything in his bedroom.' While not established by the state it should be added that three days prior to the search and seizure McGee, Gins and Koegler had rented the house on 115th Street, had paid deposits and had the utilities turned on and had moved into the house agreeing to share the rent and expenses. This is the sum and substance of the state's proof and may in itself be sufficient to dispose of this appeal but to put the case in its precise posture it may be well to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Konrad
...to deliver the drugs. Cf. People v. Wolfe, 440 Mich. 508, 524, 489 N.W.2d 748 (1992).5 This Court also distinguished State v. McGee, 473 S.W.2d 686 (Mo.1971), relied on by the defendant. That case involved marijuana found in containers (the heroin in Bercheny was in open piles) in a house t......
-
State v. Quinn, 38799
...reference to search and seizure, the courts view the "totality of the circumstances" and the "concrete factual context." State v. McGee, 473 S.W.2d 686, 687 (Mo.1971); Butters, 507 S.W.2d at 52; Hall, 508 S.W.2d at The context of the situation here was that a robbery had recently taken plac......
-
State v. Hall
...the Fourth Amendment considerations with reference to search and seizure, we must view the 'totality of the circumstances', State v. McGee, 473 S.W.2d 686 (Mo.1971), and the 'concrete factual context', Sibron v. State of New York, 392 U.S. 40, 59, 88 S.Ct. 1889, 20 L.Ed.2d 917 (1968); Kansa......
-
State v. Moiser
...may have had joint control of the premises and defendant's " 'proximity to persons or locations with drugs about them.' " State v. McGee, 473 S.W.2d 686, 687 (Mo. 1971). Cf. State v. Jackson, 576 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Mo.App.1979). Without evidence of corroborating, incriminating circumstances b......