Court Opinion

ID: 9687381
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:27:02.397062+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:26.869395
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
The defendant, Beraid H. Andry, was tried by a jury and convicted of the crime of possessing a narcotic drug, to wit: several capsules containing an opium derivative in violation of R.S. 40:962. He was sentenced to serve ten years in the State penitentiary at hard labor. On this appeal the accused is relying on two bills of exceptions to obtain a reversal of the conviction.
The two bills present the same question, i. e., whether there is evidence in this record tending to show that the defendant had constructive possession of the capsules. By these bills, Andry contends there was no showing by the State of constructive or actual possession by himself of said evidence.
We find no error in the trial court’s finding that the defendant did have constructive possession by virtue of the fact he had guilty knowledge of how many capsules were in the residence and that his knowledge connected him with the exhibits. State v. Smith, 257 La. 1109, 245 So.2d 327 (1971).
*81For these reasons, we find the defendant-appellant’s contentions to be without merit. The conviction and sentence are affirmed.