 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Gilliam4/12/2000
The defendant, Michael T. Gilliam, appeals from his Class E felony conviction of manufacturing marijuana. The trial court imposed the maximum sentence of two years to be served in the Department of Correction. In this appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence and the length of the sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Tenn. R. App. P. 3; Judgment of the Criminal Court is Affirmed
Witt, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Riley, J., and Woodall, J., joined.
OPINION
A Hawkins County Criminal Court jury convicted the defendant of one count of the Class E felony of manufacturing marijuana, and the trial court imposed the maximum incarcerative sentence of two years. Based upon the proof of the defendant's constructive possession of growing marijuana plants, we conclude the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction. We also conclude that the record supports the trial court's sentence.
On July 2, 1998, a Hawkins County Sheriff's Department officer, who was trained to spot growing marijuana plants from the vantage point of helicopter flight, flew over the defendant's rural Hawkins County property and adjacent tracts of land. The officer spotted a patch of marijuana growing in a "cut out area" in the midst of cedar trees and brush. From the air, the officer could see "a path that led back to the corner of the yard of the mobile home" from the patch in the cut out area. He also saw a second patch "behind the shed, which it looked like it was adjacent to the mobile home."
The officer in the helicopter summoned ground crew officers to the scene who followed the path from the mobile home yard to the marijuana patch in the cut out area. There were no fences or other obstructions to foot travel along this path. Also, in the area behind the shed, the officers found 28 marijuana plants, some of which were bedded in wooden planters. The shed was approximately 40 feet from the mobile home, and a photograph that was admitted into evidence showed that the end of the mobile home was visible from the location of these 28 plants.
The defendant owned the property where the mobile home sat, and he resided in the mobile home with his wife, his three sons, and his wife's brother, Alvin "Chipmunk" Carter. Although the evidence is not clear, the area around the shed where the 28 plants were discovered was apparently located on the defendant's property. The patch of marijuana located at the end of the path in the cut out area was not situated on the defendant's property but was located on a tract of land whose non- resident owner was not identified in the record.
The defendant's brother-in-law, Alvin "Chipmunk" Carter, had been residing with the defendant at the mobile since Carter's release from jail six to eight weeks before July 2. He left the home on July 3, the day after the officers discovered the marijuana. Mr. Carter testified that he had previously been convicted on two occasions for possession of marijuana, but he invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked if he knew about the marijuana that was discovered on July 2. The defendant testified that he had no knowledge of either patch of marijuana.
In his first issue, the defendant complains that the evidence was not sufficient to support the conviction. The defendant maintains that the state failed to prove that he possessed the growing marijuana. When an accused challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence, this court must review the record to determine if the evidence adduced at trial is sufficient "to support the finding by the trier of fact of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." Tenn. R. App.
Page 1 2 3 4 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|