State v. Flinchpaugh

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that once controlled substance is assimilated into the body, the person no longer has control over it
• limiting the definition of \possession or control” as to not include \[ejvidence of a controlled substance after it is assimilated in a person’s blood”
• presence of drugs in bloodstream is circumstantial evidence of prior possession, but not sufficient by itself to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt
• presence of drugs in bloodstream is circumstantial evidence of prior possession, but not sufficient by itself to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt
• while drug in person’s blood can be used as circumstantial evidence to prove prior possession, it is insufficient to establish guilt because the drug could have been injected involuntarily or by trick
• drug in person’s blood can be used as circumstantial evidence for proof of prior possession, but not sufficient evidence to establish guilt, since the drug could have been injected involuntarily or introduced by artifice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).