accident that the vehicle was involved in this that the court could not see the gas where the narcotics actually were at the time that mr brown was traveling they encountered a very intoxicated man who in the time was asked by master sergeant hart whether there were any other occupants and he said no other than that there were no statements by the defendant the narcotics have been brown was found for a period of about four miles so other than that there was no evidence that mr brown and ongoing regular control vehicle there was no evidence to connect mr brown to the so in terms of analyzing this case in the new bailey this state has an affirmative obligation to link the defendant to the restroom vehicle to show ongoing regular control this is not a case where mr brown is found in his home in our cars are found secreted in some area that's a different that's a different situation where you deal with the defendant who's a homeowner where you can presume that a homeowner has regular ongoing control over all of the contents of their home in from their action and for an hour or two in a vehicle situation it's different in the bailey court talks about the distinction between  the circumstances of the accident that occurred in this case but when we talk about secret compartments and secrete in things you know we have to we have here and on an item that would be similar in size or larger the in the contraband in this case and it was in the glove compartment not a secret compartment but it was a compartment and on the court there talked about in bailey talked about i of the driver's seat now it wasn't safe it wasn't down in the trunk and where the back seat it wasn't found on the passenger side area it wasn't even in the book compartment it was on the floorboard and th thirty so yes i'm looking at the two pictures i don't see anything over there the bag that seems to be where it normally would been set and i defense by defense pro counsel and this hearing which occurred on july sixteenth two thousand and fifteen and it's found in the record one thirty six through page one thirty eight the defend it and nor the packaged he's he's seen it he knows what it knows what hair heroin is he's he's been convicted of it when he sees a big bank he most likely he's going to know how it's packaged  testify as through a familiarity connection or other acknowledge connection between the defendant and the registered owner of the registered owner see age she she w brown that individuals listed on the state's answer to discovery in the had a period of three or four years to bring that person in to subject that person to interviews or indeed elicit that testimony  that the trooper dude is master sergeant hart encountered a single male inside a vehicle sitting in front passenger seat with his back to the passenger passenger side door in the slot legs didn't requires absolute outright reversal in him so i don't think the court reaches the jury we were issue in terms of a new trial but it sure would waiver issue is interesting because it happened seventeen months prior with a household that was along the chain of custody issue requires outright reversal and i think that the court the court has has talked about some of the troubling aspects as to the chain of custody but even if we put that issue completely to the side and analyze this case as