California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Perry, 244 Cal.Rptr.3d 281, 32 Cal.App.5th 885 (Cal. App. 2019):
Appellant attempts to avoid this conclusion by challenging respondents assertion that "[o]ne has to possess marijuana in order to smoke or ingest it." Appellant points out that possession is not necessarily an inherent aspect of smoking or ingesting marijuana. A person can smoke marijuana without possessing it, for example, by smoking a joint in the possession of another person. Caselaw has recognized that "[i]ngestion ... at best raises only an inference of prior possession." ( People v. Palaschak (1995) 9 Cal.4th 1236, 1241, 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 722, 893 P.2d 717.) "[D]epending on the circumstances, mere ingestion of a drug owned or possessed by another might not involve sufficient control over the drug, or knowledge of its character, to sustain a drug possession charge." ( Ibid . ; People v. Spann (1986) 187 Cal.App.3d 400, 408, 232 Cal.Rptr. 31 [" possession, as used in [ Penal Code section 4573.6 ],
[244 Cal.Rptr.3d 286]
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.