pickup, and that Kingsland was a passenger in the pickup for some unknown duration. The driver did not testify. None of the state’s evidence indicates that Kingsland should have or could have known that he was in close proximity to illegal chemicals based upon their appearance and location in the truck. In order to conclude that it was Kingsland who was in control of the chemicals, jars, and bottles rather than the driver or the owner of the truck, the jury would have to speculate. Officer Caldwell testified that Kingsland appeared “somewhat very nervous,” but we do not believe that an individual acting “somewhat very nervous” in itself suffices to show guilt in the absence of any other evidence. See State v. Bush, Cuyahoga App. No. 81959, 2003-Ohio-4054, 2003 WL 21757516, at ¶ 12-14 (<HOLDING>); State v. Mayer, Cuyahoga App. No. 80168,
holding that evidence that the defendant lived in a home where marijuana was being cultivated was insufficient to support a finding of constructive possession holding that insufficient evidence proved constructive possession when the defendant was merely in the vicinity of pcp the smell of pcp was in the air the defendant had 34 onedollar bills and there was no evidence that the defendant knew what pcp smelled like holding that the defendant lacked sufficient contacts with the forum state because there was no evidence the defendant knew where the product would be sold holding that evidence was insufficient to prove constructive possession where the defendant was in jail at the time the drugs were seized from his residence holding that although there was evidence of discrimination based on race there was insufficient evidence to support a finding of constructive discharge