Summary
In Thames v. State, 366 So.2d 1261 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) the opinion is so brief as to be cryptic, but it reads as an endorsement of Spataro that proof that the accused occupied a room either exclusively or jointly with others is sufficient to support a conviction of possession of illegal drugs found out of plain view in that room. If that is what the case holds, it has not taken into account what Spataro and Frank and their progeny cited above said and held.
Summary of this case from Thompson v. StateOpinion
No. KK-355.
February 7, 1979. Rehearing Denied March 21, 1979.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Escambia County, Joseph M. Crowell, J.
Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, Janice G. Scott and John D.C. Newton, III, Asst. Public Defenders, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Thames appeals from his conviction of possession of more than five grams of marijuana, contending that the evidence was insufficient to show his possession of the substance. Police, executing a search warrant, found the marijuana in the top drawer of a dresser in the bedroom where Thames was sleeping. Others shared possession of the house. Yet, the drawer that contained the marijuana also contained mail addressed to Thames, and a photograph of Thames was hung on the wall of the bedroom. The evidence was sufficient to show that Thames was in exclusive possession of the bedroom or, if it was in his joint possession only, he had knowledge of the presence of the marijuana in the drawer and the ability to maintain control over it. See Hively v. State, 336 So.2d 127 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).
AFFIRMED.
MILLS, Acting C.J., and ERVIN, J., concur.