 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Stubblefield5/20/2005
Facts and Procedural History
The charges against the defendant arose as part of the 21st Judicial District Drug Task Force's undercover narcotic operations. On two different occasions, the defendant was involved in the sale of Lortab to an informant in Lewis County. The grand jury returned separate indictments on each count.
The record reflects that Joe Ashmore ("Ashmore"), an agent with the drug task force, was contacted by Jamie Garrison ("Garrison"), who indicated that he was interested in assisting the drug task force by making undercover drug transactions. Subsequently, Garrison learned that the defendant would be receiving Lortab and informed the defendant on April 18, 2003, that he would probably be making a purchase from him.
The following day, Garrison's vehicle and person were searched, and he was equipped with a transmitting device and a hard-wire unit. He was also given $40, with previously recorded serial numbers, to be used in making the purchase. Garrison proceeded to the home of Robert Crowe ("Crowe"), where the defendant was present, to conduct the transaction. Ashmore was able to monitor the transaction from a parking lot near Crowe's residence and made a tape recording of the transaction. Shortly after arriving, Garrison asked the defendant if he had any Lortab, to which the defendant responded affirmatively. Garrison also asked the defendant if he would sell the pills for $5 each. The defendant agreed, and Garrison purchased "four 7.5 [milligram] Lortabs" from the defendant for $20.
Thereafter, Garrison met Ashmore at a predetermined location to deliver the pills and return the remaining $20 that he did not use in the transaction. Joey Kimble ("Kimble"), the director of the drug task force, later submitted the pills for identification analysis. Glenn Everett, a Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) forensic scientist, ultimately identified the pills as dihydrocodeinone, or Lortab, a Schedule III controlled substance.
On April 23, Garrison targeted another individual from which to purchase drugs; however, after failing to locate the original target, the decision was made to make another purchase from the defendant. After several attempts to locate the defendant, Garrison spoke with Brandi Sharp ("Sharp"), who was standing in front of the defendant's home. A few minutes later, the defendant came out of the house, and Garrison asked the defendant if he would sell him additional pills. In response, the defendant instructed Garrison to meet him at Crowe's house.
Garrison arrived at Crowe's home, followed by the defendant, Sharp, and Nadine Hinson ("Hinson"). Garrison and the defendant went into another room, and the defendant asked Garrison if he was "wired," to which Garrison responded, "What do you think?" Hinson then came into the room and stated that she "thought [the defendant] wasn't gonna do that," referring to selling the pills to Garrison. The defendant told Hinson that he was going to sell three Lortab and keep three. Accordingly, when Hinson left the room, the defendant sold Garrison three "Lortab 10's" for $30.
As before, the defendant met Ashmore to deliver the pills and the unused money. The pills were then turned over to the TBI crime lab, where William H. Stanton identified them as Lortab.
Analysis
I. Sufficiency
On appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to prove (1) that the defendant acted knowingly, and (2) that the transaction constituted a sale. When an accused challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court must review the record to determine if the evidence adduced during the trial was sufficient "to
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.
|
|