The Third Appellate District reversed a trial court judgment. The court held that a jury did not engage in misconduct when it questioned, and ultimately recalculated, an expert’s estimate of the potential yield from a marijuana garden.
Eric Engstrom was charged with possession of marijuana for sale and cultivation of marijuana. At Engstrom’s jury trial, the prosecution offered evidence regarding Engstrom’s maintenance of a sophisticated marijuana growing room, with an irrigation timer, a supply of carbon monoxide, overhead retractable lighting, vents, oscillating fans, a thermostat monitoring humidity levels, and a charcoal filter to eliminate odors. The room contained 75 marijuana plants in varying stages of maturity. An adjacent room held six female marijuana plants which could be cloned to make new plants. This room also had an area for drying, trimming, and processing marijuana. A search of the remainder of Engstrom’s house had revealed more than $15,000 in cash and a loaded revolver.
