Fontenot v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2011-KA-00700-COA
Linked Case(s): 2011-KA-00700-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 10-09-2012
Opinion Author: Barnes, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Possession of controlled substance - Sufficiency of evidence - Constructive possession
Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Griffis, P.J., Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell and Fair, JJ.
Dissenting Author : Russell, J.
Dissent Joined By : Irving, P.J., and Ishee, J.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 02-22-2011
Appealed from: Harrison County Circuit Court
Judge: Lisa P. Dodson
Disposition: CONVICTED OF POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AND SENTENCED TO EIGHT YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WITH ONE YEAR AND ONE DAY TO SERVE AND THE REMAINDER TO BE SERVED UNDER POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION, AND TO PAY A $2,000 FINE, $200 TO THE CRIME VICTIMS’ COMPENSATION FUND, AND $50 IN RESTITUTION
District Attorney: Cono A. Caranna, II
Case Number: B-2401-10-284

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Nicholas Paul Fontenot a/k/a Nicholas Fontenot




ERIN ELIZABETH PRIDGEN



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: LISA LYNN BLOUNT  

Synopsis provided by:

If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals
hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office.

Topic: Possession of controlled substance - Sufficiency of evidence - Constructive possession

Summary of the Facts: Nicholas Fontenot was convicted of possession of a controlled substance and sentenced to eight years, with one year and one day to serve, and the remainder of the sentence to be served under post-release supervision. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Because Fontenot did not have actual possession of the methamphetamine, he was convicted under the theory of constructive possession. Fontenot argues that there was insufficient evidence that he was in constructive possession of methamphetamine. To establish constructive possession, the drug simply has to be found near the defendant in a place over which the defendant exercises dominion or control. When illegal substances are found on premises not owned by the defendant, the State must show other incriminating circumstances, in addition to proximity, in order to prove constructive possession. It was never established who had rented the hotel room in which the methamphetamine was found. However, the methamphetamine was lying in plain sight next to Fontenot’s wallet. There were clothes and shoes scattered around the room, and many of the items belonged to Fontenot. Fontenot also possessed Xanax and a vial that had contained the pills he had dropped. A cap matching the container (vial) that he had in his possession was on the table next to his wallet and the bag of methamphetamine. Fontenot was standing over the bag of methamphetamine and was the only person inside the hotel room when the police arrived at the door. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, there was sufficient evidence to convict Fontenot of constructive possession of the methamphetamine.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court