Background
After a traffic stop and arrest for suspected impaired driving, jail officers found Smith carrying a plastic bag containing individually packaged tan rocklike material and a separate white powder. Crime-lab testing showed that the tan material was a mixture of heroin and fentanyl. Smith also had fentanyl and cocaine in his blood.
The State ultimately tried Smith on charges including possession with intent to deliver heroin and possession with intent to deliver fentanyl. The jury convicted him on both drug-delivery counts and convicted him of the lesser-included offense of cocaine possession. Smith challenged the fentanyl conviction, arguing that the evidence did not establish he knew the tan substance contained fentanyl.
The Court’s Holding
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals reversed the fentanyl conviction and directed the circuit court to enter a judgment of acquittal on that count. The jury instructions required the State to prove that Smith knew or believed the substance was fentanyl, and the appellate court evaluated the evidence against those instructions.
The court held that the proof was insufficient for a reasonable jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Smith knew the substance contained both heroin and fentanyl. There was no direct evidence of Smith’s knowledge; no evidence that heroin and fentanyl were visibly distinguishable; no evidence that the material was packaged or sold as containing both drugs; and no reasonable basis to infer Smith used the particular mixture merely because fentanyl was found in his blood. The court affirmed the judgment and postconviction order in all other respects and did not reach Smith’s remaining arguments.
Key Takeaways
- Sufficiency review is measured against the jury instructions actually given when those instructions conform to the charged offense.
- Evidence that a drug mixture contains fentanyl does not alone prove the defendant knew it contained fentanyl.
- Once the State failed to prove the required knowledge element, the proper remedy was acquittal on the fentanyl count.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that drug-mixture prosecutions require evidence tied to the defendant’s knowledge of the specific controlled substance when the jury has been instructed that such knowledge is an element. General evidence about drug trends, drug use, or the presence of another substance in a defendant’s system cannot substitute for proof supporting that inference beyond a reasonable doubt.