State v. McLane, No. 25677.
| Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
| Writing for the Court | John E. Parrish |
| Citation | 136 S.W.3d 170 |
| Docket Number | No. 25677. |
| Decision Date | 09 June 2004 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Mark K. McLANE, Defendant-Appellant. |
v.
Mark K. McLANE, Defendant-Appellant.
[136 S.W.3d 171]
John M. Albright and Stephen E. Walsh, Moore, Walsh & Albright, L.L.P., Poplar Bluff, MO, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen. and Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
JOHN E. PARRISH, Judge.
Mark K. McLane (defendant) appeals a conviction for the class C felony of possession of methamphetamine, a controlled substance. § 195.202.1 He asserts one point on appeal; that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilty. This court affirms.
In adjudicating [a claim that evidence was insufficient to support a guilty verdict], this court accepts as true all of the evidence favorable to the State, including all favorable inferences drawn therefrom, and disregards all evidence and inferences to the contrary. State v. Grim, 854 S.W.2d 403, 405 (Mo.banc 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 997, 114 S.Ct. 562, 126 L.Ed.2d 462 (1993). This court's review is limited to a determination of whether there is sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror
might have found [defendant] guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.
State v. Camerer, 29 S.W.3d 422, 423 (Mo. App.2000).
On the evening of January 19, 2001, Missouri State Highway Patrol Trooper C.R. Colbert observed a Ford pickup being driven on U.S. Highway 67 near Greenville, Missouri, in Wayne County, without a light illuminating its rear license plate. See § 307.075.1. Officer Colbert stopped the pickup truck.
The pickup had two occupants, the driver and owner of the truck, David Robbins, and defendant. Robbins got out of the pickup and approached Trooper Colbert's patrol car. Trooper Colbert exited his patrol car and met Robbins in the area between the two vehicles. Defendant remained in the pickup.
Robbins provided his driver's license and proof of insurance to Trooper Colbert. Trooper Colbert asked if Robbins had any drugs or weapons in his vehicle. He said, "No," and told Trooper Colbert that he could search Robbins' vehicle if he wanted. Trooper Colbert told Robins that was a good idea and requested assistance.
Trooper Colbert placed himself where he could watch Robbins and defendant at the same time. Trooper Colbert was asked what he observed with respect to defendant. He answered:
Well it was very cold that night and while I was waiting on Trooper Ayres to arrive [to assist], [defendant] had rolled the window down and I looked over, I saw him roll the window down and then I don't remember exactly what [Robbins] did, but he drew my attention, I looked over at David Robbins and when I looked back at [defendant] the window was being rolled up.
After Trooper Ayres arrived, Trooper Colbert walked to the passenger side of the pickup where he saw a green change purse lying on the ground about two feet from the vehicle. There was snow on the ground; however, the purse was clean and dry. There were no tire marks near the purse other than those from Robbins' pickup. Trooper Colbert was asked what he did. He answered, "I walked over and picked it up and the first thing that struck me as odd was it was still warm, it wasn't cold. I would have thought it would have been had it been there awhile, but it wasn't[,] it was warm. I opened it up and looked inside and saw a white powder substance." The change purse and contents were submitted for laboratory analysis. It contained 0.40 grams of methamphetamine.
After showing the contents of the change purse to Trooper Ayers, Trooper Colbert closed the purse, walked over to the passenger door of the pickup, and asked defendant to step out. Defendant told Trooper Colbert, "That was there, that's not mine," although Trooper Colbert had not shown the object to defendant. Trooper Colbert placed Robbins and defendant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. McCleod, No. WD 64945.
...and conduct of the accused from which it can be fairly inferred he or she knew of the existence of the contraband.'" State v. McLane, 136 S.W.3d 170, 173 (Mo.App. S.D.2004) (quoting State v. Elmore, 43 S.W.3d 421, 427 (Mo.App. S.D.2001)). Evidence that the defendant had actual possession of......
-
Ross v. Cassady, Case No. 14-0778-CV-W-ODS-P
...find relying on [State v. Webster, 754 S.W.2d 12 (Mo. App. 1988)], [State v. Camerer, 29 S.W.3d 422 (Mo. App. 2000)], [State v. McLane, 136 S.W.3d 170 (Mo. App. 2004)], and [State v. Belton, 108 S.W.3d 171 (Mo. App. 2003)], supra at pp. 4-6, that his possession, although fleeting, when coup......
-
State v. Koch, No. SD 33054
...of contraband where the contraband is on his person or within easy reach and convenient control. § 195.010(34); State v. McLane, 136 S.W.3d 170, 173 (Mo.App.S.D.2004). The parties agree that Koch did not have actual possession of the one-pot meth lab. “Where actual possession is not present......
-
State v. Pfaltzgraff, No. 2-089 / 11-0470
...upheld jury verdicts on similar evidence showing recent possession through the temperature of the contraband. See, e.g., State v. McLane, 136 S.W.3d 170, 173-74 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004) (finding sufficient evidence that defendant "undertook to surreptitiously dispose" of contraband where change ......
-
State v. McCleod, No. WD 64945.
...conduct of the accused from which it can be fairly inferred he or she knew of the existence of the contraband.'" State v. McLane, 136 S.W.3d 170, 173 (Mo.App. S.D.2004) (quoting State v. Elmore, 43 S.W.3d 421, 427 (Mo.App. S.D.2001)). Evidence that the defendant had actual possession o......
-
Ross v. Cassady, Case No. 14-0778-CV-W-ODS-P
...find relying on [State v. Webster, 754 S.W.2d 12 (Mo. App. 1988)], [State v. Camerer, 29 S.W.3d 422 (Mo. App. 2000)], [State v. McLane, 136 S.W.3d 170 (Mo. App. 2004)], and [State v. Belton, 108 S.W.3d 171 (Mo. App. 2003)], supra at pp. 4-6, that his possession, although fleeting, when coup......
-
State v. Koch, No. SD 33054
...of contraband where the contraband is on his person or within easy reach and convenient control. § 195.010(34); State v. McLane, 136 S.W.3d 170, 173 (Mo.App.S.D.2004). The parties agree that Koch did not have actual possession of the one-pot meth lab. “Where actual possession is not present......
-
State v. Pfaltzgraff, No. 2-089 / 11-0470
...upheld jury verdicts on similar evidence showing recent possession through the temperature of the contraband. See, e.g., State v. McLane, 136 S.W.3d 170, 173-74 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004) (finding sufficient evidence that defendant "undertook to surreptitiously dispose" of contraband whe......