All right today we're so about Maryland versus Pringle, which is a United States federal Supreme Court ruling regarding constructive possession.

A lot of guys will call me and say, hey, where do we have the ruling for constructive possession?

This is a case adopted by New Jersey and we've adopted the federal standards. You're not going to find what it says New Jersey and explains this. You'll find cases that were talked about in New Jersey and probably referred to this. It's 6 o'clock on a Friday. Let's see what kind of

of participation we get in this live stream. The guys who are getting involved in this one have a really fair shot at making a

getting themselves and winning themselves a shirt so it'll be a simple contest and

what I'm gonna do is read you T I can't ask

I see your your watch and I can't give you a shirt because I just gave you one the

other day.

Regarding constructive possession

Maryland v Pringle 2003 and basically we give you just some history on the case.

Respondent Pringle was the front seat passenger in a car that was stopped for speeding.

Upon stopping the car, the arresting

officer found money in the glove compartment and cocaine in the backseat armrest.

The officer arrested all three occupants of the car and Pringle was convicted for possession

with intent to stream cocaine.

He after he signed a written confession.

Pringle appealed arguing that probable cause to arrest him did not exist.

So what happened was they get pulled over, officer develops a probable cause to search the vehicle.

There's three people in there. They deny consent.

I'm sorry, they deny ownership of any of the stuff found and they're all arrested because nobody fesses up to it.

So the one guy says, look, I'm not going down for this.

It doesn't matter. Nobody said the third plague took it,

...