# State v. Rich

> Court of Appeals of North Carolina · October 20, 1987 · 87 N.C. App. 380

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9573745

## Case

- **Full name:** State of North Carolina v. Cheryl Catherine Rich
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of North Carolina
- **Decided:** October 20, 1987
- **Citations:** 87 N.C. App. 380; 361 S.E.2d 321; 1987 N.C. App. LEXIS 3168
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Wells
- **Judges:** Eagles, Martin, Wells
- **Cited by:** 40 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9573745

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that evidence which showed that the "defendant was present on the premises when the cocaine was found," along with other evidence, constituted evidence of "other incriminating circumstances"

## Opinion text

Judge Wells
dissenting.
In State v. McLaurin, 320 N.C. 143 , 357 S.E. 2d 636 (1987), our Supreme Court held that where the defendant’s control of the premises was nonexclusive, there must be other incriminating circumstances (such as close proximity to the contraband found on the premises) to establish constructive possession. The only distinction I can discern between the essential facts in McLaurin and the facts in this case is that in this case defendant was physically present on the premises when the contraband was found. I am not persuaded that this is a sufficient difference for us to distinguish this case from McLaurin . Taking the position that the evidence was insufficient to show constructive possession by defendant, I vote to vacate defendant’s convictions.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9573745. Public record. Not legal advice.