1.  Presumption

Knowledge may be presumed so long as the facts giving rise to the presumption have a rational connection to a person’s possible knowledge.{footnote}Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6 (1969)(presumption that person possessing marijuana knows it was illegally imported struck down).  Check County Court of Ulster County v. Allen, 442 U.S. 140 (1979).{/footnote}  See also PRESUMPTIONS.  Everyone is presumed to have knowledge of matters which are common knowledge,{footnote}Kahn v. James Burton Co., 5 Ill. 2d 614, 126 N.E.2d 836 (1955).{/footnote} and to have anticipated occurrences which reasonable persons would know will probably occur.{footnote}Kahn v. James Burton Co., 5 Ill. 2d 614, 126 N.E.2d 836 (1955).{/footnote}

On the constitutionality of presumptions against the defendant in criminal cases, see PRESUMPTIONS.

2.  Stolen Property

Possession of stolen property recently after the crime gives rise to a presumpition that the person in possession had knowledge that the property was stolen.{footnote}Rugendorf v. United States, 376 U.S. 528, 11 L.Ed.2d 887, 84 S.Ct. 825 (1964); United States v. Di Carlo, 64 F.2d 15 (2d Cir. 1933); United States v. Allegrucci, 258 F.2d 70 (3d Cir. 1958); United States v. Riso, 405 F.2d 134 (7th Cir. 1968).

See also 15 ALR Fed 856 (presumptions under National Motor Vehicle Theft Act (the "Dyer Act"), 18 U.S.C. §§ 2312, 2313).{/footnote}  [Violation of priv. against self-incrimination???]{footnote}Check United States v. Allegrucci, 258 F.2d 70 (3d Cir. 1958); United States v. Andrews, 429 F.2d 574 (5th Cir. 1970); Check  88 ALR3d 1178.{/footnote}  The defendant must have been in exclusive possession.{footnote}51 ALR3d 727.{/footnote}  Whether possession is considered "recent" is often subject to contoversy.{footnote}See United States v. Riso, 405 F.2d 134 (7th Cir. 1968)(presumption allowed despite fifteen month gap); 89 ALR3d 1202.{/footnote}

Constructive possession. Constructive possession is not sufficient to give rise to a presumption of knowledge.{footnote}United States v. Grasso, 437 F.2d 317 (3d Cir. 1970).
Check United States v. Virciglio, 441 F.2d 1295 (5th Cir. 1971).{/footnote}

3.  Narcotics

One who owns and is driving an automobile is presumed to have knowledge and control over any narcotics found in the vehicle.{footnote}United States v. Mallory, 460 F.2d 243 (10th Cir. 1972).{/footnote}

4.  Relevance of Knowledge

[West sec. 109]

5.  Opinion as to Knowledge