STATE OF MARYLAND v. HECTOR LEONEL GUTIERREZ
& EDGAR PEREZ-LAZARO
Court of Appeals, Battaglia, Filed Jan. 28, 2016,
Possession – Sufficient to prove possession where defendants lived in a small apartment and gun and drugs were located in various common areas throughout the apartment; both stayed in apartment; papers for both found in apartment.

(Dissent – Greene, Adkins and McDonald join – State failed to establish ownership of apartment by defendant or proximity to contraband; no evidence adduced as to length of time defendants were there)

Ok, Battaglia’s law clerk wins. Unless Judge Battaglia is a fan of biggy, I’m assuming that it was the clerk that decided to provide the following analysis:

certainly business-wise drug dealers know to “never get high on your own supply.” The Notorious B.I.G., Ten Crack Commandments, on Life After Death (Bad Boy Records 1997) (stating that rule “Number 4: I know you heard this before / Never get high on your own supply”).

Possession – Drugs scattered around common areas of the apartment allowed inference of knowledge and dominion/control

Possession – There are 4 factors relevant to possession:
1) Defendant’s proximity to the item
2) Whether the item was in plain view and/or accessible to the defendant
3) Whether there was indicia of mutual use and enjoyment
4) whether the defendant had an ownership or possessory interest in the location

Closing Argument – Where defense said (with regard to lack of DNA testing in case) “if you read the paper at least once a week… you’ll see somebody who is found guilty on words is able to prove their innocence because of science and technology”, not abuse of discretion for court to allow prosecutor to say that “no one in the few drug cases I’ve had, no cop has ever found drugs come with the defendant’s name on it”