 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Cobb12/2/1999
2d 42, 46 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992). The identification or chain of custody is sufficient "if the facts establish a reasonable assurance of the identity of the evidence" and its integrity. State v. Woods, 806 S.W.2d 205, 212 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990); State v. Kilburn, 782 S.W.2d 199, 203 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1989). The question of whether the chain of custody has been sufficiently established by the proof rests within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of that discretion. Holloman, 835 S.W.2d at 46.
The State produced the testimony of Officer Hickman who identified the two marijuana cigarettes and the cellophane wrapper containing the separately packaged marijuana and hydrocodeinone pills as the items seized from the appellant. Then, Officer Hickman provided that he immediately recorded the items in the log book and turned them over to Officer Wallace. Wallace identified the drugs and the cellophane wrapper as the items given to him by Officer Hickman that he later sent to the crime lab. Moreover, the appellant testified that he normally carried his hydrocodeinone pills inside a cellophane wrapper or plastic bag.
The fact that Officer Hickman did not place identifying marks on the bag or drugs goes to the weight and credibility of the evidence and not their admissibility. Finding no abuse of the trial court's discretion, this issue is without merit.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
DAVID G. HAYES, Judge
CONCUR: GARY R. WADE, Presiding Judge DAVID H. WELLES, Judge
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|