Logourl black
From our private database of 14,200+ case briefs...

Smith v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland
999 A.2d 986 (2010)


Facts

City of Baltimore, Maryland police officers executed a search warrant on the first floor of a dwelling where a number of occupants were found in a haze of marijuana smoke. One of the occupants, Clavon Smith (defendant), was seated at a table within arm’s reach of a smoldering marijuana joint on one side and a jacket containing 15 baggies of marijuana in a pocket on the other side. Smith was charged with and convicted of possession of marijuana. Smith appealed, arguing that the state failed to prove that he had actual possession of any of the marijuana.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Harrell, J.)

Dissent (Bell, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 250,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.