Is possession not an essential element of the transportation of marijuana?

In support of this position appellant relies on People v. Rogers (1971) 5 Cal.3d 129, 95 Cal.Rptr. 601, 486 P.2d 129. In Rogers, the court observed that possession of contraband is not an essential element of transportation, since one may transport contraband that is in the exclusive possession of another. Accordingly, the court held that the defendant's acquittal of possession of marijuana did not necessarily preclude a conviction of transportation of marijuana. In a footnote, however, the court qualified this statement: "In cases where defendant's possession is incidental to, and a necessary part of, the transportation charged, and no prior, different or subsequent possession is shown, the offense of possession is deemed to be necessarily included in the offense of transportation, and defendant may not be convicted of both charges. [Citations.]" (5 Cal.3d at p. 134, fn. 3, 95 Cal.Rptr. 601, 486 P.2d 129.)