State v. Resnick, 41839
| Decision Date | 15 May 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 41839,41839 |
| Citation | 177 N.W.2d 418,287 Minn. 168 |
| Parties | STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Arthur I. RESNICK, Appellant. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
Evidence held insufficient to support a finding of guilt in a prosecution for possession or control of a narcotic drug, i.e., marijuana.
Stacker, Silverstein, Burke & Radsom, and Morry N. Rothstein, St. Paul, for appellant.
Douglas M. Head, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, George M. Scott, County Atty., Henry McCarr
and David Roston, Asst. County Attys., Minneapolis, for respondent.
Heard before KNUTSON, C.J., and ROGOSHESKE, SHERAN, PETERSON and FRANK T. GALLAGHER, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of conviction of the offense of knowingly possessing and having under control a narcotic drug, towit, Cannabis Sativa L. (commonly known as marijuana).
The issue for decision is whether sufficient evidence was adduced to establish to the reasonable certainty required in criminal prosecutions that defendant violated Minn.St. 618.02, which provides:
'Except as authorized by this chapter it shall be unlawful for any person to sell, prescribe, administer, dispense or furnish to a minor, or manufacture, possess, have under his control, sell, prescribe, administer, dispense, or compound any narcotic drug.'
By the terms of § 618.01, subd. 14, the words 'narcotic drugs' are defined as follows:
"Narcotic drugs' means coca leaves, opium, cannabis, isonipecaine, amidone, isomidone, ketobemidone, and every other substance neither chemically nor physically distinguishable from them * * *.'
Minn.St. 618.01, subd. 23, defines Cannabis as follows:
"Cannabis' includes all parts of the plant Cannabis Sativa L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of such plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such plant, its seeds, or resin; but shall not include the mature stalks of such plant, fiber produced from such stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of such plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture or preparation of such mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of such plant which is incapable of germination.'
We can and do take judicial notice of the fact that 'Cannabis,' sometimes called 'marijuana,' grows in the State of Minnesota in a wild state and that possession or control of it may or may not justify the inference of contemplated use as a 'narcotic drug,' depending upon the circumstances of the particular case.
The principal contention of the appellant is that the evidence in the record to be reviewed was inadequate to justify a finding that defendant violated the proscription of § 618.02. We agree with the claim of appellant and the judgment of conviction is reversed.
There is no evidence whatever that defendant was in actual possession of any narcotic drug on August 29, 1968, the date specified in the information. A leather briefcase was discovered inside a suitcase found in the trunk of a Corvair automobile owned by one Patricia Simon, and there was evidence from which the trial court could have concluded that defendant was in possession of a key which afforded access to this car. There were identifying materials in the suitcase and the briefcase which could have justified the inference that these objects were owned by defendant. The investigating authorities were able to extract from the interstices of the briefcase a small quantity of a material which they...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Siirila
...that possession of an unusable quantity of marijuana does not constitute a crime. He relies mainly on our decision in State v. Resnick, 287 Minn. 168, 177 N.W.2d 418 (1970) and State v. Morgan, 287 Minn. 406, 178 N.W.2d 697 Our decision in Resnick is based for the most part on a determinati......
-
State v. Ali, No. C2-00-70.
...where only a trace amount of a substance was found, citing State v. Morgan, 287 Minn. 406, 178 N.W.2d 697 (1970); State v. Resnick, 287 Minn. 168, 177 N.W.2d 418 (1970); and State v. Lewis, 394 N.W.2d 212 (Minn.App.1986), review denied (Minn. Dec. 12, 1986). But none of these cases is contr......
-
State v. Florine
...See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411, 205 N.W.2d 667 (1973); State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 195 N.W.2d 435 (1972); State v. Resnick, 287 Minn. 168, 177 N.W.2d 418 (1970). Following this approach, we have concluded that there was sufficient evidence of constructive possession to justify a co......
-
State v. Carr
...See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411, 205 N.W.2d 667 (1973); State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 195 N.W.2d 435 (1972); State v. Resnick, 287 Minn. 168, 177 N.W.2d 418 (1970).' In this case the police found the heroin in a cabinet in the living room of a house which defendant shared with a woman......