 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Pore6/9/2004
Vincent Pore appeals from his conviction, following a trial to the court, for possession of cocaine in violation of Iowa Code section 124.401(5) (2001). AFFIRMED.
Vincent Pore appeals from his conviction, following a trial to the court, for possession of cocaine in violation of Iowa Code section 124.401(5) (2001). He contends the court erred in finding the evidence sufficient to prove he had committed that offense. We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
The following facts are set forth in the record. On the evening of September 25, 2002 Pore was driving in his car on Highway 927 when off-duty Muscatine County Sheriff's Deputy Michael Bailey observed Pore's car swerve over the center line three to five times. Deputy Bailey suspected Pore was driving while intoxicated and used his cell phone to report Pore's erratic driving. He then followed Pore until State Trooper Robert Turpin arrived to follow Pore and investigate. Shortly after Turpin began to follow Pore, Pore pulled into a convenience store and stopped. Turpin approached the vehicle on the driver's side and began to speak with Pore.
Pore told Trooper Turpin he was going to his friend "Mike's" house to pick up a pack of cigarettes he had left in Mike's vehicle. The trooper asked if Pore had any weapons on him and Pore stated he had a pocket knife. Turpin then asked Pore to exit the vehicle and to leave the knife in the car. As Pore was getting out of the car Turpin asked for, and received, permission from Pore to search him for any additional weapons. However, before Pore got out of the car, Turpin observed him "fishing into his right pocket" and moving his hand in and out of the pocket as though attempting to empty something from the pocket.
After Pore was out of the car the trooper asked again for consent to search him and Pore consented. During the pat down search of Pore, Turpin found a metal socket in Pore's left pants pocket. It was a deep-well 7/32 socket, it was clogged in the center, it smelled of marijuana, and had ashes and burn marks on it. Trooper Turpin testified at trial that based on his experience he knew such sockets are sometimes used to consume controlled substances. He found no other tools on Pore.
After Turpin found the socket he performed three field sobriety tests on Pore to determine if he was intoxicated. Turpin testified that Pore passed the field sobriety tests. After the tests Turpin issued Pore a citation for possession of drug paraphernalia and gave him a warning for proof of insurance. He then gave Pore his driver's license back, and said he would like Pore to look at a form for consent to search his vehicle before he left. Pore apparently read the consent form and signed it, giving Turpin consent to search his vehicle. The trooper then searched Pore's car and found a plastic baggie of marijuana and a packet of rolling papers hidden in the upholstery in the front passenger seat. Turpin testified that these items were within easy reach of someone in the driver's seat. He also testified that a videotape was made of the stop and the search of Pore. When the marijuana was discovered Pore, alone in Trooper Turpin's car, made a statement to the effect, "I would have smoked it." His statement was picked up by the video camera in the trooper's car.
The State charged Pore by trial information with possession of marijuana, in violation of Iowa Code section 124.401(5). The metal socket and the plastic baggie were submitted to the DCI Criminalistics Laboratory for testing. The results received by the State confirmed both the plant material in the baggie and the residue taken from the socket were marijuana. The testing also showed there was p
Page 1 2 3 4 Iowa DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|