What is the test for constructive possession in a criminal case?

7 We review de novo whether the jury instructions, in their entirety, adequately cover the defendant's theory of defense. United States v. Duran, 59 F.3d 938, 941 (9th Cir.) (citing United States v. Gomez-Osorio, 957 F.2d 636, 642 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 535 (1995). If, however, the parties dispute whether the required factual foundation exists for a particular instruction, we review for abuse of discretion. Id.

8 It is, however, clear in this circuit that "neither proximity to the contraband, presence on property on which contraband is recovered nor association with a person having actual possession of the contraband is sufficient proof of constructive possession." United States v. Chambers, 918 F.2d 1455, 1459 (9th Cir.1990) (citations omitted). This is because "[m]ere proximity, presence and association 'go[ ] only to [the contraband's] accessibility, not to the dominion or control which must be proved to establish possession.' " Id. (citation omitted).