Lehman v. State

The evidence was insufficient to support the defendant's convictions for methamphetamine possession and oxycodone possession, because the State failed to prove that the defendant had constructive possession of the contraband.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

After a jury trial, Donald Ray Lehman was convicted of possession of methamphetamine and possession of oxycodone, and sentenced to ten years probation. He appeals, arguing that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erred in refusing to give his written request to charge on the law of mere association. We agree that the evidence is insufficient to support the convictions and therefore reverse. Accordingly, we do not reach Lehman’s jury charge argument.

On an appeal following a conviction, the evidence must be viewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, and appellant no longer enjoys a presumption of innocence; moreover, on appeal this court determines evidence sufficiency, and does not weigh the evidence or determine witness credibility. Webb v. State, 228 Ga. App. 624, 625 2 492 SE2d 312 1997 citations and punctuation omitted. So viewed, the evidence showed that on April 20, 2013, a deputy sheriff pulled over the pickup truck in which Lehman was a passenger because a headlight was not working. Lehman’s co-defendant, Kermit Nobles, Jr., owned the truck and was the driver. The officer had Nobles step out of the vehicle and obtained Nobles’s consent to search the vehicle. The officer searched the truck while Lehman was still inside the truck and Nobles was still outside, and saw a container on top of a pile of clothes on the back seat floorboard. The container held .11 grams of methamphetamine and one tablet of oxycodone. Both Lehman and Nobles denied having knowledge of the container and were each arrested.

Lehman v. State

The evidence was insufficient to support the defendant's convictions for methamphetamine possession and oxycodone possession, because the State failed to prove that the defendant had constructive possession of the contraband.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report