(a) Possession of a false or forged prescription for a regulated drug by any person other
than a pharmacist in the pursuance of his or her profession shall be presumptive evidence
of his or her intent to use the same for the purpose of illegally obtaining a regulated
drug.
(b) The presence of a regulated drug in an automobile, other than a public omnibus, is
presumptive evidence of knowing possession thereof by each and every person in the
automobile at the time such drug was found; except that such presumption does not
apply:
(1) to a duly licensed operator of an automobile who is at the time operating it for hire
in the lawful and proper pursuit of his or her trade;
(2) to any person in the automobile if one of them, having obtained the drug and not being
under duress, is authorized to possess it and such drug is in the same container as
when he or she received possession thereof; or
(3) when the drug is concealed upon the person of one of the occupants. (Added 1967, No. 343 (Adj. Sess.), § 21, eff. March 23, 1968.)
Rivas v. United States, 783 A.2d 125 (D.C. 2001). · cites it 2ד, LEXIS through 2001 legislation) (controlled substance in automobile other than public omnibus is presumptive evidence of possession); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 4221 (b) (LEXIS through 2000 legislation) (regulated drugs in automobile other than public omnibus is presumptive…”
State v. Robert Scales, 206 A.3d 1263 (Vt. 2019). · cites it 2דWhen the trial court determines that such an inference is supported by the evidence, a jury may infer that the defendant knowingly possessed a drug based on the fact that the defendant was present in an automobile where a regulated drug was found.”
State v. Goyette, 594 A.2d 432 (Vt. 1991). “” 18 V.S.A. § 4221(b). Pursuant to V.R.E. 303 and recent Vermont case law, see, e.”
State v. Lane, 282 A.2d 796 (Vt. 1971). · cites it 4דA related statute, 18 V.S.A. § 4221(b), to which the certified questions are directed, provides: *438 “The presence of a regulated drug in an automobile other than a public omnibus, is presumptive evidence of knowing possession thereof by each and every person in the automobile…”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 4221(b) — 3 cases
State v. Robert Scales, 206 A.3d 1263 (Vt. 2019). “When the trial court determines that such an inference is supported by the evidence, a jury may infer that the defendant knowingly possessed a drug based on the fact that the defendant was present in an automobile where a regulated drug was found.”
State v. Goyette, 594 A.2d 432 (Vt. 1991). “” 18 V.S.A. § 4221(b). Pursuant to V.R.E. 303 and recent Vermont case law, see, e.”
State v. Lane, 282 A.2d 796 (Vt. 1971). “A related statute, 18 V.S.A. § 4221(b), to which the certified questions are directed, provides: *438 “The presence of a regulated drug in an automobile other than a public omnibus, is presumptive evidence of knowing possession thereof by each and every person in the automobile…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.