Kier v. State
292 Ga. App. 208, 663 S.E.2d 832 (2008) (2008)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
To prove constructive possession of contraband, the state must show a connection between the defendant and the contraband that is more than mere spatial proximity; it must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly had both the power and the intention to exercise dominion or control over it.
Facts:
- Sergeant Zack Tanner initiated a traffic stop of a vehicle owned and driven by Cory Dixon, which was traveling slowly with its emergency lights flashing.
- A juvenile was in the front passenger seat; Lavashiae Kier was seated in the rear seat behind the driver, and her friend, Chiquita Baker, was seated next to her.
- Upon approaching the vehicle, Sergeant Tanner smelled marijuana and observed smoke inside the car.
- A search of the vehicle revealed a recently smoked, hand-rolled marijuana cigarette on the rear floorboard behind the center console.
- Police also found crack cocaine in the driver's door compartment.
- Chiquita Baker testified that the driver, Cory Dixon, and the juvenile passenger had been smoking the marijuana cigarette, not Kier.
- Baker also testified that Kier was unaware that Baker herself had separately-acquired marijuana hidden in her underwear.
Procedural Posture:
- Lavashiae Kier was charged with possession of less than one ounce of marijuana.
- Following a bench trial in the trial court, Kier was convicted of the charge.
- Kier appealed her conviction to the Georgia Court of Appeals, an intermediate appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a defendant's mere presence as a passenger in a vehicle where marijuana is found, without any other incriminating evidence, sufficient to prove constructive possession beyond a reasonable doubt?
Opinions:
Majority - Miller, Judge
No. A defendant's mere presence near contraband is insufficient to sustain a conviction for constructive possession. The State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kier had constructive possession of the marijuana because it did not show any connection between her and the contraband other than her presence in the car. To establish constructive possession, the prosecution must prove that the defendant knowingly had both the power and the intention to exercise control over the substance. Power can be inferred from access, but intent must be derived from surrounding circumstances. Here, there were no additional circumstances indicating Kier's intent, such as attempts to flee, erratic behavior, being under the influence, or possessing paraphernalia. Because the State's case was based wholly on circumstantial evidence that was consistent with Kier's theory of innocence—that she was merely a passenger—the evidence did not exclude every other reasonable hypothesis and was therefore insufficient for a conviction.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms the high evidentiary bar for proving constructive possession, particularly in cases involving passengers in a vehicle. It strongly reinforces the principle that mere presence near contraband, without more, is insufficient to establish guilt. The ruling clarifies that when relying on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must present facts that affirmatively exclude all reasonable hypotheses of innocence. This precedent protects individuals from being convicted based on association or proximity alone, requiring specific evidence linking the defendant to the illegal item.
Unlock the full brief for Kier v. State