In State v. Ellis, 161 W. Va. 40, 239 S.E.2d 670 (W. Va. 1977), the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals interpreted "constructive transfer" to mean "the transfer of a controlled substance either belonging to an individual or under his control by some other person or agency at the instance or direction of the individual accused of such a constructive transfer." The second was a Nebraska case in which the defendant instructed an undercover officer to retrieve the contraband from a wastebasket. Holding that the transaction in question was a "constructive transfer," the Supreme Court of Nebraska remarked: "it is not necessary for the State to show actual physical transfer of a controlled substance from the defendant. The statutory definition of delivery clearly encompasses more than actual, direct transfers. It includes constructive and indirect transfers as well." The third was a New Mexico case where a controlled substance was mailed to the recipient. The New Mexico Court of Appeals held: "Placing the controlled substance in the mail had the effect of turning the controlled substance over to an agent for delivery. This amounts to a constructive transfer."