Statutes. Statutory interpretation presents
a question of law.
Judgments: Appeal and Error. An appellate
court independently reviews questions of law decided by a
Convictions: Evidence: Appeal and Error. In
reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the
evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct,
circumstantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the
same: An appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the
evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh
the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact. The
relevant question for an appellate court is whether, after
viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the
prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the
essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
Convictions: Corroboration: Witnesses: Testimony:
Controlled Substances. Under the Uniform Controlled
Substances Act, corroboration is sufficient to satisfy the
requirement that a conviction not be based solely upon
uncorroborated testimony of an individual cooperating with
the prosecution if the witness' testimony is corroborated
as to material facts and circumstances which tend to support
the testimony as to the principal fact in issue.
Criminal Law: Corroboration: Testimony.
Testimony of a cooperating individual need not be
corroborated on every element of a crime.
Controlled Substances. A person possesses a
controlled substance when he or she knows of the nature or
character of the substance and of its presence and has
dominion or control over it.
Controlled Substances: Evidence: Circumstantial
Evidence: Proof. Possession can be either actual or
constructive, and constructive possession of an illegal
substance may be proved by direct or circumstantial evidence.
Neb. App. 361] 8. Controlled
Substances: Circumstantial Evidence: Intent.
Circumstantial evidence may support a finding that a
defendant intended to distribute, deliver, or dispense a
controlled substance in the defendant's possession.
:__:__. Circumstantial evidence sufficient to establish
possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver
may consist of evidence of the quantity of the substance,
equipment and supplies found with the substance, the place
where the substance was found, the manner of packaging, and
the testimony of witnesses experienced and knowledgeable in
from the District Court for Lancaster County: Robert R. Otte,
B. Kalemkiarian, of Berry Law Firm, for appellant.
Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Erin E. Tangeman
Riedmann, Arterburn, and Welch, Judges.
Franco appeals from a conviction, pursuant to jury verdict,
for possession of methamphetamine with the intent to deliver
in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-416(1) (Reissue
2016). On appeal, Franco alleges that a cooperating
individual's testimony was not sufficiently corroborated
and that the jury verdict rested on insufficient ...