IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT JACKSON
AUGUST SESSION, 1999
FILED
STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) C.C.A. NO. W1999-01884-CCA-R3-CD
December 29, 1999
)
Appellee, ) Cecil Crowson, Jr.
) Appellate Court Clerk
) LAUDERDALE COUNTY
VS. )
) HON. JOSEPH E. WALKER,
JIMMY ROBINSON, ) JUDGE
)
Appe llant. ) (Posses sion of Co caine w ith
) Intent to Deliver)
ON APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:
C. MICHAEL ROBBINS PAUL G. SUMMERS
46 North Third Street, Suite 719 Attorney General and Reporter
Memphis, TN 38103
J. ROSS DYER
GARY F. ANTRICAN Assistant Attorney General
District Public Defender 425 Fifth Avenu e North
Nashville, TN 37243
JULIE K. PILLOW
Assistant Public Defender ELIZABETH T. RICE
4705 Mueller Brass Road District Attorney General
Covington, TN 38019 302 Market Street
Somerville, TN 38068
OPINION FILED ________________________
AFFIRMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 20
DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE
OPINION
The Defenda nt was convicte d on a jury verdict of posse ssion with intent to
deliver .5 or more grams of cocaine, a Class B felony. In this appeal, he argues
prima rily that the evidence introduced against him is insuffic ient to s uppo rt his
conviction . We disagree and affirm the judgm ent of the tria l court.
Law enforce ment o fficers obta ined a se arch wa rrant for the Defend ant’s
apartm ent. The Defendant was present when they executed the warrant and the
officers found .5 grams of crack cocaine in the form of three separate pieces or
“rocks.” Over the Defendant’s objection, the officers were allowed to testify that
on the night prior to the execution of the warrant, they had observed several
individuals, over the course of approximately an hour and a half, approach the
Defe ndan t’s apartmen t, knock on his d oor, and then leave after no one opened
the door. The Defendant was not present in his apartment during this period of
time. The D efend ant arg ues th at allow ing this testim ony co nstitute s rever sible
error bec ause th e eviden ce is not re levant an d is highly p rejudicial.
The Defen dant also argues that the record supports no more than a
conviction of simple possession and asks th at this Court modify his conviction
accordingly. The Defendant testified that the cocaine which he possessed was
for his personal use and denied that he intended to sell or deliver any of the
cocaine. The State presented testimony which supported its theory of the case.
W e believe the testimony presented at trial demonstrated classic jury issues
concerning the cred ibility of the witne sses, the weight an d value to be given the
evidence, and other factual matters. The jury obviously resolved all of these
issues in favor of the State.
-2-
W e conclud e that the e vidence presen ted is sufficie nt to support the finding
by the trier of fact of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We further conclude that
no error of law requiring a reversal of the judgment is apparent on the record.
Based upon a thorough reading of the record, the briefs of the parties, and the
law governing the issues presented for review, the jud gme nt of the trial cou rt is
affirmed in accordance with Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal Appeals of
Tenn essee .
____________________________________
DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE
CONCUR:
___________________________________
JERRY L. SMITH, JUDGE
___________________________________
JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., JUDGE
-3-