Angel Marie Lowry, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case Summary

[1] Following a jury trial, Angel M. Lowry was convicted of Level 2 felony dealing in methamphetamine and Level 6 felony possession of a narcotic drug. Lowry appeals, arguing that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support her convictions.

[2] We affirm.

Facts & Procedural History

[3] Around July 2022, Lowry began living in the front bedroom of a home rented by Wendy Ferguson. By July 2023, Ferguson grew tired of “too much traffic going in and out of the house at different hours” and told Lowry to move out. Transcript Vol. 2 at 198. As of July 31, however, Lowry still lived in the home.¹ When Ferguson left for work around 7:30 that morning, Lowry was sitting on the bed in Lowry's room.

[4] Around mid-morning, Ferguson saw through her home security camera that Steven Phillips, Lowry's boyfriend, had arrived at the house. According to Ferguson, Phillips was not supposed to be there. Shortly after Phillips arrived, he called Ferguson using FaceTime. Ferguson could see Lowry slouched over in a chair, drooling, and not talking or moving. Phillips was “[p]anicked” and screamed at Ferguson, “tell me what she took.” Id. at 199, 200. Ferguson had “no idea” and instructed Phillips to immediately take Lowry to the emergency room. Id. at 200. After Phillips hung up the phone, Lowry watched the feed from the security camera. When Ferguson did not see anyone leave the home, she called 911.

[5] Law enforcement officers, medics, and firefighters arrived minutes later as Phillips was dragging Lowry out of the house onto the front porch. Medics tended to Lowry, who was unconscious, pale, and experiencing respiratory distress, symptoms commonly associated with an overdose. Medics administered Narcan, and within a few minutes, Lowry regained consciousness, sat up, and told police officers she had taken fentanyl or heroin, but that there was “none left.” Id. at 178. Sergeant Thomas Dillingham of the Frankfort Police Department (FPD) asked Lowry if he could go inside the house and into her bedroom, but Lowry refused to consent.

[6] FPD Officer Charles Baetz called Ferguson at work. Ferguson expressed concern that her dogs, which were loose inside the home, would ingest drugs that may have been left out in the open. She gave officers limited permission to enter the home and secure the dogs. Officers entered the home and were accompanied by Phillips, who was familiar with the dogs and could help secure them. No one entered Lowry's room. While inside FPD Officer Jeremy Rushton observed a black bag on a table in the living room and denied Phillips's request to remove the bag from the home.² As soon as the dogs were secured, Phillips and the officers exited the home.

[7] Thereafter, police secured a search warrant. After searching Ferguson's bedroom, the shared bathroom, and the kitchen area, officers found only a small amount of marijuana belonging to Ferguson. In the black bag that was on the living room table, officers discovered 27.25 grams of methamphetamine, small empty baggies, a prescription bottle with Phillips's name, and mail addressed to Phillips.

[8] Detective Chad Walker searched Lowry's room. On a desk just inside the door, he located prescription bottles for both Lowry and Phillips, mail addressed to Lowry at that address, three pipes with methamphetamine residue, and a couple of cell phones. On the bed, Detective Walker found a plastic bag containing a green plant-like material on top of a tie-dyed bag. There was cash in the front pouch of the bag and inside the main compartment, they found a pink wallet containing Lowry's driver's license and approximately $5500 in cash. A brown “cigar-type box” was also on the bed and had a loose “green plant-like” material on top of it. Transcript Volume 3 at 39. Inside the box, Detective Walker found three knotted plastic bags of methamphetamine and a smaller bag containing a hard powdery substance that field-tested positive for fentanyl.

[9] Near the box and on the bed was a black jewelry box containing a small baggie of methamphetamine. Also on the bed was a red plastic container that contained a torn-open bag of methamphetamine as well as a sealed bag of methamphetamine. Digital scales were found on the bed next to this container. Detective Walker also found two notepads with names and numbers or “dollar amounts,” which he believed to be ledgers like the kind commonly used by drug dealers to record money owed and paid. Id. at 51. The evidence found in Lowry's room was collected and tested. In total there were 48.12 grams of methamphetamine and .48 grams of fentanyl found in Lowry's bedroom.

[10] On August 21, 2023, the State charged Lowry with Level 2 felony dealing in methamphetamine, Level 3 felony possession of methamphetamine, and Level 5 felony possession of a narcotic drug. The State also alleged Lowry was a habitual offender. A three-day jury trial commenced on September 22, 2025.

[11] At trial, Officer Pickrell testified that he had been with FPD since 2014 and that he specializes in narcotics investigations. From his training and experience, he knew that 3.5 grams of methamphetamine, also known as an “8 ball,” is the average weight of individual methamphetamine purchased and that such amount typically costs between $80 and $120. Id. at 11. He testified that the types of baggies found in the black bag were like the baggies he had seen used to distribute methamphetamine. Detective Walker similarly testified regarding weights and packaging of narcotics. He added that the larger bags of methamphetamine with smaller baggies such as the type found in Lowry's room were typical of how narcotics are packaged and distributed. He also testified that digital scales are used by both drug users and dealers and that it is not unusual to find drugs and scales in the same vicinity.

[12] At the conclusion of the evidence, the jury found Lowry guilty as charged. Thereafter, Lowry admitted to being a habitual offender. At sentencing, the trial court vacated the Level 3 felony offense and then sentenced Lowry to a total aggregate sentence of thirty years with two years suspended. Lowry now appeals. Additional facts will be provided below as necessary.

Discussion & Decision

[13] Lowry challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her convictions. Specifically, Lowry argues that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she constructively possessed the drugs found in the home. Lowry emphasizes that she did not have exclusive possession of the home and points the finger at Phillips, noting that he was often at the home, that he was present the morning of her overdose, and that items belonging to Phillips were found in the home and in her bedroom. She also points out that the black bag containing methamphetamine found in the general living area of the home was associated with Phillips and that Phillips actually possessed drugs on his person. Lowry also makes much of the fact that she was supposed to be moving out in a matter of days and had packed her belongings in tubs and suggests that this cuts against any inference that she had the capability or intent to maintain dominion and control over the drugs found in her bedroom. Under these circumstances, Lowry contends that the State failed to present evidence that proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she had knowledge of the contraband and intent to control it. We disagree.

[14] Our standard of review for sufficiency of the evidence challenges is well-settled:

[We] neither reweigh the evidence nor judge witness credibility. Rather we consider only the evidence supporting the judgment and any reasonable inferences drawn from that evidence. We will affirm a conviction if there is substantial evidence of probative value that would lead a reasonable trier of fact to conclude that the defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Dowell v. State, 206 N.E.3d 1167, 1170 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023) (quoting Powell v. State, 151 N.E.3d 256, 262-63 (Ind. 2020) (internal citations omitted)).

[15] To convict Lowry of Level 2 felony dealing in methamphetamine, the State had to prove that she knowingly or intentionally possessed more than ten grams of methamphetamine with the intent to deliver. See Ind. Code § 35-48-4-1.1(a)(2), (e)(1). To convict her of Level 6 felony possession of a narcotic drug, the State had to prove that she knowingly or intentionally possessed fentanyl, a narcotic drug classified in Schedule II. See I.C. § 35-48-4-6(a).

[16] The State may prove that a defendant possessed contraband by showing that she either had actual or constructive possession of it. Canfield v. State, 128 N.E.3d 563, 572 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019), trans. denied. The issue presented pertains to constructive possession. “A person constructively possesses contraband when the person has (1) the capability to maintain dominion and control over the item; and (2) the intent to maintain dominion and control over it.” Gray v. State, 957 N.E.2d 171, 174 (Ind. 2011).

[17] A trier of fact may infer that a defendant had the capability to maintain dominion and control over contraband when she has a possessory interest in the premises on which the item at issue was found. Id. (citing Gee v. State, 810 N.E.2d 338, 340 (Ind. 2004)). We allow this inference even when that possessory interest is not exclusive. Id.

[18] The evidence established that Lowry had the capability to maintain dominion and control over the drugs. Indeed, the drugs were found in the room Lowry rented from Ferguson, and although she was in the process of moving out, Lowry still lived there. Lowry's possessory interest in the room was confirmed by presence of her belongings, including prescription bottles and mail with her name on them, and a wallet with her driver's license. Further, on the morning of Lowry's overdose, Ferguson last saw Lowry sitting on the bed in Lowry's room. Lowry also exercised her authority when she refused to consent to a search of her room, thereby requiring the police to obtain a search warrant. Contrary to Lowry's argument, the capability to maintain dominion and control over the premises does not require the possessory interest be exclusive. See Gray, 957 N.E.2d at 174; Young v. State, 478 N.E.2d 50, 51 (Ind. 1985) (finding defendant “exercised private dominion over her own bedroom” even though she shared the home with others).

[19] To establish intent, the State is required to demonstrate that the defendant had knowledge of the presence of the contraband. Goliday v. State, 708 N.E.2d 4, 6 (Ind. 1999). Such knowledge may be inferred from either the exclusive dominion and control over the premises containing the contraband, or, if the control is non-exclusive, evidence of additional circumstances pointing to the defendant's knowledge of its presence. Canfield, 128 N.E.3d at 572. Such circumstances may include:

(1) a defendant's incriminating statements; (2) a defendant's attempting to leave or making furtive gestures; (3) the location of contraband like drugs in settings suggesting manufacturing; (4) the item's proximity to the defendant; (5) the location of contraband within the defendant's plain view; and (6) the mingling of contraband with other items the defendant owns.

Gray, 957 N.E.2d at 175. This list is not exhaustive. Id.

[20] Here, Lowry was last seen sitting on the bed in her room. During the subsequent search of her room, officers discovered methamphetamine in an amount over four times the amount required for the offense, fentanyl, pipes used for ingesting substances, and several items associated with dealing, such as scales, ledgers, and baggies, strewn around Lowry's bed and desk. Several of the items were in plain view. The discovery of these items was immediately preceded by Lowry's overdose on drugs of the same type. And, when Lowry regained consciousness, she made incriminating statements and admitted to officers that she had ingested heroin or fentanyl, the latter of which was found in her bedroom. A jury could reasonably infer that Lowry consumed fentanyl and that such came from the supply of fentanyl found in her room. This set of factors clearly demonstrates the probability that the defendant was aware of the presence of the contraband and its illegal character.

[21] In sum, the evidence and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom sufficiently proved that Lowry constructively possessed fentanyl and at least ten grams of methamphetamine because she had the capability to maintain dominion and control over the drugs and it was her intent to do so.

[22] Judgment affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   In preparation for her move, Lowry had collected some of her belongings in tubs and stacked them in the living room.

2.   Phillips was ultimately arrested that same day. Upon his arrest, officers located a baggie of methamphetamine in his wallet alongside his identification. During a search of Phillips's car, officers found a glass pipe and a baggie containing a crystal-like substance.

Altice, Judge.

Vaidik, J. and Foley, J., concur.