People v. Mooring
Annotate this CaseLaw enforcement officers searched the home of Davis and Mooring and found over 4,000 prescription pills, many in prescription pill bottles. Their names were on some pill bottle labels, other labels bore the name of their son, Darrell. Using Ident-A-Drug, a subscription-based, login-controlled Web site, the prosecution’s criminalist presumptively identified the pills as various controlled substances. A jury convicted Davis and Darrell of five counts of possessing a controlled substance for sale (Health & Saf. Code 11351 (dihydrocodeinone/Vicodin, codeine, morphine, methadone, and oxycodone)) and one count of possessing a designated controlled substance for sale (section 11375(b)(1) (diazepam)). The court placed Davis on probation, with two years in jail, and found Darrell’s prior convictions true, denied his motion to strike those convictions, and sentenced him to 10 years in prison. The court of appeal reversed in part, finding that the prosecution did not establish dihydrocodeinone/Vicodin is a controlled substance, but otherwise affirmed. Because it is not specifically listed in sections 11055 or 11056, evidence that defendants possessed dihydrocodeinone/Vicodin is insufficient to establish they possessed a controlled substance in violation of section 11351.The Ident-A-Drug Web site comes within the published exception to the hearsay rule (Evidence Code 1340), so the defendants’ confrontation clause claim failed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.