State v. Smith
Citations
- 240 N.E.3d 1051
- 2024 Ohio 1473
Syllabus
Search warrant sufficiency possession of controlled substances criminal tools medical marijuana fruit of the search manifest weight possession immediately within reach marijuana dispensary direct physical control constructive possession knowingly exercises dominion. Judgment reversed and convictions vacated. The appellant's convictions for drug possession and criminal tools were not supported by sufficient evidence. The state failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the appellant had constructive possession of drugs or criminal tools where the state offered no evidence that the appellant had dominion or control over the area of the home where the illegal quantity of marijuana was found in the home she shared with her spouse, who held a medical marijuana license.
Judges: Groves
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. ThompkinsOhio Supreme Court· 1997-05-14· cited 16,183×
- State v. JenksOhio Supreme Court· 1991-07-31· cited 11,342×
- State v. LeonardOhio Supreme Court· 2004-12-08· cited 674×
- State v. ThomasOhio Supreme Court· 1982-05-19· cited 667×
- State v. HankersonOhio Supreme Court· 1982-05-19· cited 556×
- State v. HaynesOhio Supreme Court· 1971-03-17· cited 246×
- State v. VollOhio Court of Appeals· 2012-08-27· cited 24×
- State v. TylerOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-11-27· cited 14×
- State v. JohnsonOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-02-21· cited 13×
- State v. PaigeOhio Court of Appeals· 2012-12-06· cited 6×
- State v. TaylorOhio Court of Appeals· 2023-03-23· cited 5×
- State v. NataleOhio Court of Appeals· 2011-08-11· cited 4×
- State v. SharyOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-10-07· cited 3×
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.