Jury finds Hillsboro man guilty of meth possession

A Hillsboro man was sentenced to three years in prison Monday afternoon, after a jury seated in Highland County Common Pleas Court found him guilty of a third-degree felony charge of aggravated possession of methamphetamine.

Michael L. Carson, 45, was indicted in July and was originally charged with one count each of burglary, a second-degree felony; aggravated possession of methamphetamine, a second-degree felony; and theft, a first-degree misdemeanor. According to court records, a motion by the prosecutor to dismiss the burglary and theft charges was granted prior to the start of trial. The jury found that Carson possessed more than bulk amount but less than five times bulk amount, leading to a conviction of a third-degree felony possession charge Monday.

The jury was seated shortly before 10 a.m., and it took a little over an hour, including opening statements and initial jury instructions, to present evidence. After the jury recessed for lunch, they returned to hear closing arguments and two more rounds of instructions before deliberating for about an hour.

In her opening statements, Highland County Prosecutor Anneka Collins explained that the charge stemmed from an alleged incident on Sept. 20, 2024, where Highland County Task Force personnel and Highland County Sheriff’s Office detectives conducted a search warrant at a Hillsboro apartment where Carson lived. The search yielded “multiple containers of a crystallite substance throughout the apartment,” with the substances eventually being identified as over 20 grams of methamphetamine. 

Collins told the jury that under the law, “bulk amount” of meth is identified as three grams, with the amount of meth found in the apartment constituting “greater than five times bulk amount.” 

Defense attorney Kathryn Hapner cautioned the jury to “keep in mind things that you will not hear” during the trial.

“You will not hear any proof that Mr. Carson was a resident in this apartment,” Hapner said. “You will not hear that any drugs were found on his person.”

The state called three witnesses, beginning with Stanton Wheasler, a forensic scientist with the Bureau of Criminal Investigation. Wheasler explained the process for evaluating suspected drugs in the BCI laboratory and for the specific substances in this case, which he said he tested and identified as meth in each of the multiple containers submitted. Those containers were admitted as exhibits during the trial.

The second witness called was Captain Chris Bowen of the Highland County Task Force, who reviewed photos of the apartment during the time the search warrant was executed. Bowen identified a “camouflage container,” a “gray keychain,” “a black pouch” and a “red pouch” as having contained meth, as well as a bag that “contained some paraphernalia,” including scales.

The third and final witness was Lieutenant Vincent Antinore, a detective with the Highland County Sheriff’s Office, who testified about the execution of the search warrant at the Hillsboro apartment.

“I had multiple roles that day,” Antinore said. “I prepared the search warrant, went to the apartment, conducted surveillance, knocked on the door, made initial contact, entered the apartment, searched the apartment, that sort of thing.”

Antinore testified that Carson was “lying in bed asleep” and was “in his underwear” when officers arrived at the apartment. A pair of shorts at the side of the bed was found to have some of the containers later determined to hold meth, while other containers were found on the nightstand and in a bag next to the bed. 

Under cross examination, Antinore confirmed that the nightstand in which drugs were found was “on the opposite side from where [Carson] was sleeping” and agreed that Carson’s codefendant was the likely owner of several items found. He also testified that he spoke to the property manager, who confirmed that “Michael Carson was living with” his codefendant at the apartment, but that his name was not on the lease.

Hapner also questioned Antinore regarding the timing of officers’ initial arrival at the apartment and the actual execution of the search warrant. When Hapner asked if “at the time that the items were removed from [Carson’s] shorts, there was no search warrant,” Antinore said, “That is correct.”

After Antinore’s testimony, the state rested, and the defense did not present any evidence. The jury was excused for lunch and returned Monday afternoon to hear closing arguments and instructions.

In her first closing argument, Collins recapped the evidence presented during the morning’s proceedings and said that “the state has proven each element of aggregated possession of methamphetamine in an amount greater than five times bulk amount, and the state has proven each element beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Hapner reminded the jury that she had asked them to “pay attention to the things that you will not hear from the state.” Those things included “any testimony” that Carson and his codefendant were married or that he lived in his codefendant’s apartment.

“He was asleep in bed there, but it doesn't make him a resident,” Hapner said. “You didn't hear any testimony of any drugs being found on his person.”

Hapner also referred to the state’s characterization of the meth being located during the education of a search warrant as being not “actually correct.

“If you'll recall, when I cross examined Lieutenant Antinore, he admitted that they arrived at the apartment and knocked on the door, spoke with [Carson’s codefendant] and got Mr. Carson out of the department prior to obtaining a search warrant,” Hapner said. “Keep that in mind so they have already determined what was in there, at least partially, prior to getting their search warrant.

“I'm going to ask you, when you receive the jury instructions, to pay very careful attention to the definitions of ‘knowingly’ and of ‘possess’ or ‘possession.’”

Hapner pointed out there were “several different baggies found in several different locations,” with the largest amount found in the nightstand on the other side of the bed, “hidden in the bottom of a tissue box. 

“Mere proximity is not enough,” Hapner said. “They have to prove actual or constructive possession.

“Think, did he possess all of this meth, some of it, none of it? That's a determination for you to make. You don't have to believe that he possessed 22 grams of methamphetamine simply because 22 grams of methamphetamine were found.”

Collins told the jury that the state didn’t present evidence about Carson’s place of residence or marital status because “it’s not necessary” and not an element of the law for aggravated possession. She said whose side of the bed contained the meth was “never testified to,” but rather that Carson “was asleep in the bed and had a lot of items in the bedroom.”

Like Hapner, Collins also focused on the definition of “possession” under the law, reading the information from the jury instructions.

“A person has possession when they know that they have the object on or about their person, or in a place where it's accessible to his use or direction,” Collins said. “Two or more persons may have possession, and together they have the ability to control it. Possession can be actual or constructive.”

Collins argued that Carson “could control these drugs.

“Carson is lying in bed within arm’s reach of the drugs on the floor that were in the shorts, and within arm’s reach of a tissue box where there's over 14 grams of meth,” Collins said. “Just because all this meth isn’t in his pocket as he's lying in bed does not mean that he does not possess it.”

Collins said that a household “exercises dominion and control over” the same tissue box, no matter in which room it’s located. Collins illustrated it as being like placing your cell phone on a charger, either within an arm’s reach or in another room. Even when the phone is “on the other side of the house, you still have constructive possession of the cell phone,” she told the jury.

Along with the 14 grams of meth found in the tissue box, Collins said that “several items were removed from [Carson’s shorts]” and found to contain meth, as were the scales.

Regarding the amount of meth, Collins told the jury that the BCI report shows that 22 grams were identified, which constitutes “greater than 15 grams.”

Collins concluded that the state has “overcome the burden of proof.

“We have proven each and every element of this crime beyond a reasonable doubt, including the amount of methamphetamine,” she told the jury. “I’m asking you to use your reason of common sense and find this defendant guilty of aggravated possession of meth.”

After approximately an hour of deliberations, the jury reached a decision, with deputy clerk Carol Shaw reading the verdict finding Carson guilty of aggravated possession of methamphetamine with an additional finding that the amount of meth was equal to or exceeding bulk amount but less than five times bulk amount (not greater than five times bulk amount, as the state argued).

Highland County Common Pleas Court Judge Rocky Coss elected to proceed with sentencing after thanking and dismissing the jury, with Collins asking the judge to impose the maximum sentence of 36 months, referring to Carson’s pretrial conduct as well as his prior criminal history. That includes a conviction of two counts of aggravated trafficking in meth in April of this year from another Task Force case.

Hapner asked for Carson to be able to continue community control and to complete treatment through the STAR program. 

However, Coss said that “this case was not known to the court” at the time of Carson’s sentencing earlier this year. 

“I guess the basis of the jury's finding is because 14 grams were found in the tissue box on the other side of the bed, that's, I think, why they came up with the decision that they did,” Coss told Carson. “I don't have any doubt that based upon just the evidence in this case, as well as looking at the whole picture, you were most likely selling dope, selling drugs.”

Coss sentenced Carson to three years in prison, with jail time credit of 74 days. In addition, Carson’s community control sentence in the other case will be tolled until his release from prison in the possession case.

“After that, you'll be required to complete the rest of the committee control,” Coss said to Carson. “You’re to report to the probation department by the end of the next business day after you are released, and then you'll be required to comply with all those conditions.”

Publisher's note: A free press is critical to having well-informed voters and citizens. While some news organizations opt for paid websites or costly paywalls, The Highland County Press has maintained a free newspaper and website for the last 26 years for our community. If you would like to contribute to this service, it would be greatly appreciated. Donations may be made to: The Highland County Press, P.O. Box 849, Hillsboro, Ohio 45133. Please include "for website" on the memo line.