Sufficiency of the evidence; Possession with intent to deliver; Knowing possession with intent to deliver

Finding sufficient evidence to support defendant’s possession of a controlled substance less than 50 grams with intent to deliver and possession of meth with intent to deliver, the court affirmed. At the residence on Union Street, his “personal items were discovered comingled with the drugs.” They included his “identification cards and court papers. The presence of defendant’s personal items stored alongside the drugs in a padlocked bedroom is circumstantial evidence that creates a reasonable inference that [he] possessed what was stored inside the locked room, including the drugs.” Given the totality of the circumstances, the court held that the prosecution “presented sufficient evidence for the trial court to find that there was a sufficient nexus between defendant and the drugs found at the Union Street residence for purposes of possession.” As to the drugs found at the residence on Jackson Street, his “statements made on the telephone while in jail similarly show circumstantial evidence that creates a reasonable inference that defendant had possession over the drugs found inside the shed. During telephone calls, he referred to the drugs as ‘his sh**’ or ‘his stuff.’” While he did not explicitly refer “to the drugs by name, it was clear from the context of defendant’s predicament and the recordings themselves that [he] was referring to illegal drugs.” Thus, the court concluded that the prosecution presented sufficient evidence “that defendant possessed the drugs found in the shed at the Jackson Street residence.” As to the intent to deliver, the court noted that in “the padlocked bedroom at the Union Street residence, where defendant stored his personal items, law enforcement found several bags of illegal substances in amounts larger than that for personal use; amounts commonly associated with drug trafficking. Some of the bags were packaged such that there were multiple smaller bags of drugs in one larger bag. According to trial testimony, this is a packaging method commonly associated with drug trafficking. Law enforcement also found a scale and unused packaging materials at Union Street, which are items necessary to independently package drugs.” Further, during a search of the Jackson Street residence, “drugs were found in amounts commonly associated with drug trafficking. Moreover, not a single item consistent with personal use, such as a needle or pipe, was discovered at either residence.” Thus, the totality of the circumstances supported “a reasonable inference that defendant possessed the drugs found at Jackson Street and Union Street with the intent to deliver.”