IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
FILED
AT KNOXVILLE August 27, 1999
Cecil Crowson, Jr.
JULY 1999 SESSION Appellate C ourt
Clerk
STATE OF TENNESSEE, * C.C.A. # 03C01-9808-CC-00293
Appellee, * ANDERSON COUNTY
VS. * Hon. James B. Scott, Jr., Judge
MELVIN JEROME ANDERSON, * (Sale of Cocaine)
Appellant. *
For Appellant: For Appellee:
Ann D. Kress, Attorney Paul G. Summers
Mostoller, Stulberg & Whitfield Attorney General and Reporter
136 South Illinois Avenue, Suite 104
Oak Ridge, TN 37830 Erik W. Daab
(on appeal) Assistant Attorney General
Criminal Justice Division
Travis Brasfield, Attorney 425 Fifth Avenue North
6220 Western Avenue Nashville, TN 37243-0493
Knoxville, TN 37921
(at trial) Jan Hicks
Assistant District Attorney General
Room 127, Anderson County Courthouse
100 North Main Street
Clinton, TN 37716
OPINION FILED:__________________________
AFFIRMED
GARY R. WADE, PRESIDING JUDGE
OPINION
The defendant, Melvin Jerome Anderson, was convicted of a sale of
cocaine greater than 0.5 gram, a Class B felony. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417.
The trial court imposed a Range I sentence of ten years and a $50,000.00 fine. In
this appeal of right, the single issue presented for review is whether the evidence
was sufficient to support the conviction.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
At approximately 4:00 P.M. on October 11, 1996, Oak Ridge Police
Sergeant Mike Uher met with an informant, Bryan Keith Turner, to plan a cocaine
purchase in the Scarboro community. Turner, who was compensated by the police
at an hourly rate of $10.00, was employed as an informant, according to Sergeant
Uher, because he had a prior criminal record which engendered an element of trust
among illegal drug suppliers in the area. Just prior to the offense, Sergeant Uher
searched Turner and his vehicle, supplied him with $300.00 in cash, and fitted him
with a wireless radio device to allow monitoring of the planned transaction.
Sergeant Uher followed Turner and watched through binoculars while Turner met
with the defendant, purchased cocaine, and then returned to a pre-arranged
meeting area. At that point, Turner, who testified at trial that he had purchased
$130.00 worth of "rocks" from the defendant, returned the illegal drugs to Sergeant
Uher. Later, Carl Smith, a forensic chemist with the TBI, confirmed that the
substance Turner had acquired amounted to 2.1 grams of crack cocaine.
Turner's wife, Rahvonna, was present during the transaction. At trial,
she testified that she had driven Turner to the place he was to meet the defendant.
She confirmed that Turner did not talk with anyone else other than the defendant
2
from the time they left Sergeant Uher until their return. Oak Ridge Police Officer
Mark Bell, who worked with a narcotic unit, set up the electronic surveillance
equipment for the transaction and monitored the receiver. He also searched
Turner's vehicle prior to the transaction. Officer Kristie Brock acted as the evidence
technician. She made copies of the cash provided Turner and searched Rahvonna
Turner to assure that she was not in possession of illegal drugs prior to the
transaction. After the transaction, Officer Brock obtained the cocaine from Turner,
sealed it, and delivered it to the TBI Crime Laboratory in Knoxville.
Judy McKnight testified for the defense as did her son, Raymond
Luster. Those witnesses claimed that the defendant was aware Turner was an
informant in the summer of 1996, well before the drug transaction supposedly took
place. The defendant did not testify at trial.
The defendant contends that because the informant had a prior
conviction for armed robbery and had a "previous drug problem," he was not
trustworthy, and the evidence was insufficient. He argues that the failure on the part
of the police to strip search Ms. Turner prior to the transaction, rather than merely
doing a pat down search, made the case against the defendant particularly suspect.
The defendant asserts that Turner's claim of cocaine delivery was uncorroborated
by any other witness. The defendant also points out that the tape recording of the
transaction contained "interference" and was not probative of guilt.
On appeal, the state is entitled to the strongest legitimate view of the
evidence and all reasonable inferences which might be drawn therefrom. State v.
Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832 (Tenn. 1978). When the sufficiency of the evidence is
challenged, the relevant question is whether, after reviewing the evidence in the light
3
most favorable to the state, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential
elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Williams, 657 S.W.2d
405 (Tenn. 1983); Tenn. R. App. P. 13(e). This court may neither reweigh nor
reevaluate the evidence offered at trial, State v. Evans, 838 S.W.2d 185 (Tenn.
1992), nor may this court substitute its inferences for those drawn by the trier of fact
from the evidence. Likas v. State, 286 S.W.2d 856 (Tenn. 1956).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417(a)(3) prohibits the sale of a controlled
substance. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417(c)(1) provides as follows:
A violation of subsection (a) with respect to: (1) Cocaine
is a Class B felony if the amount involved is point five (.5)
grams or more of any substance containing cocaine....
Here, the state offered proof on each and every element of the offense
as defined by the statute. It was the jury's prerogative to accredit the testimony of
the informant Turner and reject altogether the theory offered by the defense. The
limited scope of our review precludes either a reevaluation of the weight of the
evidence or a reconsideration of the comparative credibility of the witness. Thus,
the proof is sufficient to support the conviction.
Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
________________________________
Gary R. Wade, Presiding Judge
CONCUR:
_____________________________
David H. Welles, Judge
_____________________________
Joe G. Riley, Judge
4
State v. Melvin Jerome Anderson
Combined Opinion