Proving Intent to Deliver In Michigan

The Court has held that the "intent to deliver" element may be proven by circumstantial evidence, and may be inferred from the amount of a controlled substance possessed by the accused. People v. Wolfe, 440 Mich 508, 524; 489 NW2d 748 (1992), amended 441 Mich 1201 (1992); People v. Abrego, 72 Mich App 176, 181; 249 NW2d 345 (1976)). In Abrego, this Court deemed the evidence sufficient to support a possession with intent to deliver charge, rather than mere possession, where the defendant possessed enough heroin to produce only "35 to 46 hits." Abrego, supra at 182. The Court has also held that possessing almost four ounces of marijuana, divided into different types of packages, was sufficient to support an intent to deliver. Wayne Co Prosecutor v. Recorder's Court Judge, 119 Mich App 159, 163; 326 NW2d 825 (1982).