Court Opinion

ID: 9667329
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 01:42:43.012162+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:37.109396
License: Public Domain

ROBERTS, Judge
(concurring).
I concur in the result reached by the majority in this case. However, I must disassociate myself from that portion of the opinion stating that a charge on circumstantial evidence was unnecessary due to the “close juxtaposition” of the facts.
The charge on circumstantial evidence was not required because, as the majority observes, there was direct evidence that the appellant possessed heroin.
In view of this fact, the majority’s reliance on the doctrine of “close juxtaposition” is misleading and wholly unnecessary to the decision.
For the reasons stated, I concur.