2304. Simple Possession of Controlled Substance
The defendant is charged [in Count ______] with possessing <insert type of controlled substance>, a controlled substance.
To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that:
1. The defendant [unlawfully] possessed a controlled substance;
2. The defendant knew of its presence;
3. The defendant knew of the substance's nature or character as a controlled substance;
4. The controlled substance was <insert type of controlled substance>;
5. The controlled substance was in a usable amount.
A usable amount is a quantity that is enough to be used by someone as a controlled substance. Useless traces [or debris] are not usable amounts. On the other hand, a usable amount does not have to be enough, in either amount or strength, to affect the user.
[The People do not need to prove that the defendant knew which specific controlled substance (he/she) possessed, only that (he/she) was aware of the substance's presence and that it was a controlled substance.]
[Two or more people may possess something at the same time.]
[A person does not have to actually hold or touch something, to possess it. It is enough if the person has (control over it/ [or] the right to control it), either personally or through another person.]
[Agreeing to buy a controlled substance does not, by itself, mean that a person has control over that substance.]
[The defendant is not guilty of possessing <insert type of controlled substance> if (he/she) had a valid, written prescription for that substance from a physician, dentist, podiatrist, or veterinarian licensed to practice in California. The People have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not have a valid prescription. If the People have not met this burden, you must find the defendant not guilty of possessing a controlled substance.]
The court has a sua sponte duty to give this instruction defining the elements of the crime.
The prescription defense is codified in Health and Safety Code sections 11350 and 11377. It is not available as a defense to possession of all controlled substances. The defendant need only raise a reasonable doubt about whether his or her possession of the drug was lawful because of a valid prescription. (See People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th 457, 479 [122 Cal.Rptr.2d 326, 49 P.3d 1067].) If there is sufficient evidence, the court has a sua sponte duty to give the bracketed paragraph on the defense.
Elements. Health & Saf. Code, §§ 11350, 11377; People v. Palaschak (1995) 9 Cal.4th 1236, 1242 [40 Cal.Rptr.2d 722, 893 P.2d 717].
Constructive vs. Actual Possession. People v. Barnes (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 552, 556 [67 Cal.Rptr.2d 162].
Knowledge. People v. Horn (1960) 187 Cal.App.2d 68, 74-75 [9 Cal.Rptr. 578].
Usable Amount. People v. Rubacalba (1993) 6 Cal.4th 62, 65-67 [23 Cal.Rptr.2d 628, 859 P.2d 708]; People v. Piper (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 248, 250 [96 Cal.Rptr. 643].
Prescription. Health & Saf. Code, §§ 11027, 11164, 11164.5.
Persons Authorized to Write Prescriptions. Health & Saf. Code, § 11150.
2 Witkin & Epstein, California Criminal Law (3d ed. 2000) Crimes Against Public Peace and Welfare, §§ 77-93.
6 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 145, Narcotics and Alcohol Offenses, § 145.01[a]-[d], [b] (Matthew Bender).
(New January 2006)