Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLES JENKINS MASON

Narcotics 4.5 — knowledge of possession — instructions The trial court sufficiently instructed the jury on the question of defendant's knowledge of possessing marijuana.

Defendant was indicted for the 23 October 1974 possession with the intent to sell marijuana and was found guilty of possession of marijuana. Judgment was entered sentencing defendant as a youthful offender.

According to the State's evidence, ABC Officer Calvin Pearce observed defendant receive from someone in a van a clear plastic bag containing a green substance. Pearce recalled that defendant ". . . was sitting and talking to a girl outside of the window of the truck at this time. He was flipping the bag back and . . . [forth and] flipping it in his fingers and hands and then passed it back to Dean, who was the driver." The parties stipulated that the bag contained five grams of marijuana. In the van, authorities found 19 ounces of marijuana, individually packaged in one ounce sandwich bags and two pipes used for smoking marijuana.

Defendant claimed that he neither handled nor saw any of the marijuana. Marcia Jones essentially corroborated defendant's testimony.

MORRIS, Judge.

Defendant candidly concedes that except for his seventh assignment of error he can find no prejudicial error. By his remaining assignment of error defendant contends that the trial court failed to instruct the jury on the question of defendant's "knowledge" of possessing marijuana.

We have examined the charge contextually and find that the trial court's instructions sufficiently addresses the contention raised by the defendant herein.

We also have reviewed the record as a whole and find no error prejudicial to defendant.

No error.

Judges PARKER and MARTIN concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. MASON
(Dec 1, 1975)