Title: Carter v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 265, 2003
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: November 12, 2003

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
OLIVER CARTER, 
 
 
) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
)  No. 265, 2003 
 
 
Respondent Below, 
) 
 
 
Appellant,  
 
)  Court Below:  Family Court 
 
 
 
 
 
 
)  of the State of Delaware in 
v. 
 
 
 
 
 
)  and for New Castle County 
 
 
 
 
 
 
) 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
)  File No. 0301015075 
 
 
 
 
 
 
) 
 
 
Plaintiff Below, 
 
) 
 
 
Appellee. 
 
 
) 
 
Submitted:  October 22, 2003 
Decided:  November 12, 2003 
 
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, STEELE and JACOBS, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This  12th  day of November, 2003, upon consideration of the parties’ briefs, 
it appears to this Court that: 
1. 
On January 10, 2003 at 6:00 a.m., the Wilmington Police SWAT team 
executed a search warrant and entered the Carter residence to locate a stolen gun.  
The warrant authorized police to search Oliver Carter’s room.  When the SWAT 
team entered his bedroom, Carter was wearing only a pair of boxer shorts.  
Detective Ciritella reached for a pair of pants located immediately next to the bed.  
He checked the pants pockets before giving them to Carter to wear during the 
execution of the warrant and discovered seven small glassine bags containing 
cocaine and one bag of marijuana.  The State later charged Carter with one count 
of possession with intent to deliver crack cocaine, one count of possession of drug 
paraphernalia, and one count of possession of marijuana. 
2. 
At trial, Carter’s father, Ernest Muhammad, testified that his twenty-
one year old son and twenty-two year old nephew, who also lived at the house, 
often shared clothes with Carter because they were similar in size.  In addition, 
Muhammad testified that although it was Carter’s bedroom, the two other men 
often used the room to watch television. 
3. 
After a bench trial, the judge found Carter delinquent of possession of 
marijuana and the lesser-included offense of misdemeanor possession of crack 
cocaine.  The judge sentenced him to Level III probation for twelve months.  
Carter’s appeal alleges that the record contains insufficient evidence to support the 
finding that he was delinquent of Possession of Crack Cocaine1 and Possession of 
Marijuana.2 
4. 
We review the evidence de novo in the light most favorable to the 
State to determine whether any rational fact finder could have found the essential 
elements of unlawful possession of marijuana and cocaine beyond a reasonable 
doubt.3  In addition to its ordinary meaning, “possession” also includes the location 
in or about the defendant’s premises, belonging to, or otherwise within the 
                                                 
1 16 Del. C. § 4753 
2 16 Del. C. § 4754 (a). 
3 See McKnight v. State, 753 A.2d 436, 437 (Del. 2000) (Bench trial). 
defendant’s reasonable control.4  Constructive possession may be proved 
exclusively through circumstantial evidence.5 
5. 
In the matter sub judice there was sufficient evidence for the trial 
judge, as the sole trier of fact, to find Carter guilty of unlawful possession of 
marijuana and cocaine beyond a reasonable doubt.  Carter’s father testified that 
only Carter slept in the bedroom and that Carter’s older brother and cousin 
generally slept in the basement.  The father also testified that the men often shared 
clothes and shared the television in the bedroom.  When the police executed the 
search warrant at 6:00 a.m., Carter’s brother and cousin were asleep in the 
basement, and the police found Carter alone and asleep in the bedroom.   
6. 
While alternative explanations may exist about the drugs’ ownership, 
mere possibilities do not undermine the trial judge’s determination that Carter 
possessed the drugs.  The location of the drugs in Carter’s upstairs bedroom 
created a reasonable inference of possession,6 and the fact that the pants were 
found directly next to his bed at that hour is sufficient evidence from which a 
rational fact finder could conclude that the pants belonged to Carter.  Accordingly, 
the record contained sufficient evidence to support the adjudication.  
                                                 
4 16 Del. C. § 4701(30). 
5 Skinner v. State, 575 A.2d 1108, 1121 (Del. 1990). 
6 16 Del. C. §4701 (30). 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Family 
Court be, and hereby is AFFIRMED. 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
Justice