Supreme Court of North Carolina· 3/2/2018

State v. Chekanow

Citations

809 S.E.2d 546
370 N.C. 488

Syllabus

Sufficiency of evidence that defendants constructively possessed marijuana found growing on their property.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

recognizing that a defendant’s prior presence “in the place where the contraband was found approximately two days later” may constitute an incriminating circumstance
providing that indicators of a defendant’s “control” - 19 - STATE V. WILLIAMS Opinion of the Court over a location include his “opportunity to place contraband” on the premises, and his “possess[ion of] a key to” the location
“[E]vidence is . . . certainly not for the appellate court to reweigh . . . .”
“In determining whether -8- STATE V. ARZAMENDIA Opinion of the Court sufficient incriminating circumstances exist to support a finding of constructive possession, [courts consider] . . . other evidence found in the defendant’s possession that links the defendant to the contraband.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Beasley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

44 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named State v. Chekanow

5 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.