The Missouri Supreme Court this week ordered a Webster County circuit judge to remove the conviction and 10-year sentence imposed on a man for possessing a controlled substance because the prosecution didn't present enough evidence to prove the man actually had and controlled the methamphetamine when he was arrested.
Adriano Raphael Clark Sr., now 42, was charged in 2013 with felony possession of the drug, a class C felony.
Circuit Judge Donald C. Cheever found Clark to be a "a prior and persistent offender," raising the charge to a class A felony, then sentenced Clark to the minimum 10 years in prison.
But, Clark argued, the state didn't present sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt - the legal standard for criminal convictions - he had knowledge and control over the drugs that had been found in two closed pouches that were in the same room where he was arrested.
The Southern District appeals court last year upheld the conviction.
The appeals court listed evidence as including:
Officers responding to a 911 hang-up call of an assault in progress noticed photos of Clark and his girlfriend - who said the Marshfield apartment was hers - on the south wall of the apartment's main bedroom, where the drugs were found.
When police entered that main bedroom, Clark was sitting on the side of the bed next to the nightstand where the drugs were found - within his "easy access and control."
Men's shoes were located next to the nightstand.
A knife box and cellphone a detective believed were Clark's were on the nightstand near the drugs.
As the officers entered the room, Clark stood up and stepped away from the drugs.
Numerous clothes and a toolbox admittedly belonging to Clark were located in another bedroom.
Clark had $560 cash when he was taken into custody.
Appeals to the Supreme Court review the trial court's decision, not the appelate findings.
Four of the Supreme Court judges disagreed with all of the trial court's decision.
In a 15-page ruling written by Chief Justice Patricia Breckenridge, the high court ruled the prosecution's evidence "was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (Clark) knew of the presence and nature of the drugs and the drugs were under his control as necessary to prove either actual or constructive possession of the drugs."
The Supreme Court also said "evidence of a cell phone on the nightstand and Mr. Clark's possession of $560 was not 'additional incriminating evidence' necessary to create an inference that Mr. Clark had knowledge and control over the illegal drugs."
The court's other three judges agreed with overturning Clark's conviction and sentence, but not with how the majority reached its conclusion.
In a concurring opinion. Judge Paul Wilson wrote: "The evidence in this case was sufficient to prove that Mr. Clark had actual possession of the two pouches and their contents, but it was not sufficient to prove that he had 'knowledge of the presence and nature' of those contents, i.e., that he knew the pouches contained the controlled substance methamphetamine."
He was joined by judges Zel Fischer and Mary R. Russell.