Glass

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 774 OPINION Appellant was convicted by a jury of possession of amphetamines for sale (Health Saf. Code, § 11351 ) and was found not guilty of possession of hypodermic syringes (Bus. Prof. Code, § 4143, subd. (a)). On this appeal from the judgment he urges insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict and misconduct of the prosecutor. We find merit in his contentions and reverse the judgment. (1) To support a conviction of possession of amphetamines for sale, it must be shown that the appellant exercised control or had the right to exercise control over the controlled substance, that he had knowledge of the presence of the controlled substance, that he had knowledge of its nature, and that he had the specific intent to sell the same. ( People v. Newman (1971) 5 Cal.3d 48 , 52-53 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 12 , 484 P.2d 1356 ].) These elements may be established by circumstantial evidence and any reasonable inferences drawn therefrom. ( People v. Newman, supra, 5 Cal.3d at p. 52 .) *Page 775 Resolving all conflicts in favor of the respondent, the…