The evidence has been found insufficient to support a finding of knowing possession by a defendant who was the driver when the contraband was found in the following locations:
– In the glove compartment [see?Presswood v. State, 548 S.W.2d 398, 399-400 (Crim. App. 1977)].
– In an envelope on the dashboard of the car [see?Baltazar v. State, 638 S.W.2d 130, 131-132 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 1982, no pet.).
– In an unzipped gym bag on the passenger seat [see?Humason v. State, 728 S.W.2d 363, 366 (Crim. App. 1987)].
– In the ashtray [see?Thomas v. State, 762 S.W.2d 721, 723-724 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1988, no pet.)].
– In the trunk [see?Doyle v. State, 779 S.W.2d 492, 496 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1989, ? -); Baty v. State, 734 S.W.2d 62, 63-65 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1987, pet. ref.)].
– Underneath an armrest in the front seat between the driver and the passenger [see?Allen v. State, 786 S.W.2d 738, 739-740 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 1989, pet. granted)-original opinion].
Other examples of factual situations in which the evidence has been found insufficient to support a finding of knowing possession are:
– The defendant was a passenger in a car carrying 660 pounds of marihuana, but there was no additional evidence that the defendant knew of its presence [see?Reyes v. State, 575 S.W.2d 38, 39-40 (Crim. App. 1979)].
– The defendant entered the vehicle just before the arrest and the contraband was found under some papers near where the defendant was seated [see?McBride v. State, 780 S.W.2d 823, 824 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1989, ? -)].
– The defendant was a passenger in the back seat and contraband was found on the dashboard [see?Harvey v. State, 487 S.W.2d 75, 77-78 (Crim. App. 1972)].