State v. Santiago

19 Citing cases

  1. State v. Yon

    161 A.3d 1118 (R.I. 2017)   Cited 9 times
    Accepting the trial court's conclusion that the absence of the defendant's fingerprints "on the gun, or the magazine, or the shell casings, the cartridge casings, [did] not diminish the State's proof at all"

    Two elements must be satisfied to find constructive possession: "the defendant must have had knowledge of the presence of the contraband and * * * must have intended to exercise control over the item[s]." State v. Ditren , 126 A.3d 414, 421 (R.I. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted); seealsoState v. Santiago , 799 A.2d 285, 287 (R.I. 2002). Both of those elements "can be inferred from a totality of the circumstances."

  2. State v. Ditren

    126 A.3d 414 (R.I. 2015)   Cited 9 times
    Finding that defendant, who was a passenger in a vehicle, did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle because, among other things, "he had no ownership or possessory interest in it"

    “Consequently, the ‘reasonably satisfied standard * * * should be applied to whether [the] defendant maintained the conditions of his probation’ and not to the issue of the defendant's guilt with respect to the new charges.” State v. Pona, 13 A.3d 642, 647 (R.I.2011) (quoting State v. Sylvia, 871 A.2d 954, 957 (R.I.2005)); see State v. Santiago, 799 A.2d 285, 288 (R.I.2002). “In determining whether or not a defendant has committed a probation violation, the hearing justice is charged with weighing the evidence and assessing the credibility of the witnesses.”

  3. State v. Santos

    64 A.3d 314 (R.I. 2013)   Cited 10 times
    Discussing Long and affirming the lawfulness of the "protective" vehicle "search" because the officer "was reasonable in her belief that [the defendant] might be armed and dangerous"

    State v. Arenas, 800 A.2d 432, 434 (R.I.2002) (mem.). Knowledge of the contraband and intent to exercise control “can be inferred from a totality of the circumstances,” State v. Santiago, 799 A.2d 285, 287 (R.I.2002) (quoting In re Vannarith D., 731 A.2d 685, 689 (R.I.1999)), and typically that knowledge and intent are established by circumstantial evidence and logical inferences. See, e.g., State v. Hernandez, 641 A.2d 62, 71 (R.I.1994); State v. Mercado, 635 A.2d 260, 263–64 (R.I.1993).

  4. State v. Santiago

    847 A.2d 252 (R.I. 2004)   Cited 7 times

    Accordingly, we shall decide the appeal at this time. The facts of this case were set forth previously inState v. Santiago, 799 A.2d 285 (R.I. 2002) (per curiam) (Santiago I): "At approximately 10:30 p.m. on November 29, 2000, Anibal Santiago (Santiago or defendant), a man serving a suspended sentence with probation on three separate cases, was stopped by the Pawtucket police while operating an unregistered white Chevrolet; he did not have a valid driver's license.

  5. Cashman Equip. Corp. v. Cardi Corp.

    139 A.3d 379 (R.I. 2016)   Cited 13 times
    Affirming the denial of a motion to compel production when the request sought production of drafts considered by the opposing expert

    Standard of Review Typically, this Court's “review on a writ of certiorari is limited ‘to examining the record to determine if an error of law has been committed.’ ” Crowe Countryside Realty Associates, Co., LLC v. Novare Engineers, Inc., 891 A.2d 838, 840 (R.I.2006) (quoting State v. Santiago, 799 A.2d 285, 287 (R.I.2002) ). In conducting such a review “[w]e do not weigh the evidence on certiorari, but only conduct our review to examine questions of law raised in the petition.”

  6. State v. Quattrucci

    39 A.3d 1036 (R.I. 2012)

    Standard of Review “[T]his Court's review on writ of certiorari is limited ‘to examining the record to determine if an error of law has been committed.’ ” Crowe Countryside Realty Associates, Co., LLC v. Novare Engineers, Inc., 891 A.2d 838, 840 (R.I.2006) (quoting State v. Santiago, 799 A.2d 285, 287 (R.I.2002)). “Questions of law * * * are not binding upon the [C]ourt and may be reviewed to determine what the law is and its applicability to the facts.”

  7. State v. Robinson

    972 A.2d 150 (R.I. 2009)   Cited 8 times

    "[T]his Court's review on writ of certiorari is limited 'to examining the record to determine if an error of law has been committed.'" Crowe Countryside Realty Associates Co., LLC v. Novate Engineers, Inc., 891 A.2d 838, 840 (R.I. 2006) (quoting State v. Santiago, 799 A.2d 285, 287 (R.I. 2002)). "Questions of law * * * are not binding upon the court and may be reviewed to determine what the law is and its applicability to the facts."

  8. Henderson v. Newport County Regional Young Men's Christian Ass'n

    966 A.2d 1242 (R.I. 2009)   Cited 35 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding a report qualified as factual work product because "the report was produced at the behest of defendant's attorney . . . ."

    When a case is before this Court on a writ of certiorari, our review is "limited `to examining the record to determine if an error of law has been committed.'" Crowe Countryside Realty Associates, Co., LLC v. Novare Engineers, Inc., 891 A.2d 838, 840 (R.I. 2006) ( Crowe) (quoting State v. Santiago, 799 A.2d 285, 287 (R.I. 2002)). "We do not weigh the evidence on certiorari, but only conduct our review to examine questions of law raised in the petition."

  9. State v. Faria

    947 A.2d 863 (R.I. 2008)   Cited 22 times
    Holding statute did not allow expungement of arrest and court records, even though defendant was "acquitted or otherwise exonerated," where defendant had previously been convicted of a felony

    This Court's review "on writ of certiorari is limited 'to examining the record to determine if an error of law has been committed.'" Crowe Countryside Realty Associates Co., LLC v. Novare Engineers, Inc., 891 A.2d 838, 840 (R.I. 2006) (quoting State v. Santiago, 799 A.2d 285, 287 (R.I. 2002)). "Questions of law * * * are not binding upon the court and may be reviewed to determine what the law is and its applicability to the facts."

  10. Kedy v. A.W. Chesterton Co.

    946 A.2d 1171 (R.I. 2008)   Cited 26 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting recognition of doctrine in jurisdictions throughout United States

    As this Court often has stated, our review "on writ of certiorari is limited 'to examining the record to determine if an error of law has been committed.'" Crowe Countryside Realty Associates Co., LLC v. Novare Engineers, Inc., 891 A.2d 838, 840 (R.I. 2006) ( Crowe) (quoting State v. Santiago, 799 A.2d 285, 287 (R.I. 2002)). "Questions of law * * * are not binding upon the court and may be reviewed to determine what the law is and its applicability to the facts."