Crutchfield v. State
Decision Date | 17 August 1995 |
Docket Number | No. A95A0966,A95A0966 |
Citation | 461 S.E.2d 555,218 Ga.App. 360 |
Parties | CRUTCHFIELD v. The STATE. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Brenda H. Trammell, Madison, for appellant.
Fredric D. Bright, District Attorney, Wilson B. Mitcham, Jr., Assistant District Attorney, Milledgeville, Paul L. Groth, Assistant District Attorney, Madison, for appellee.
Defendant was charged in an indictment with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and also with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The evidence adduced at his jury trial showed that defendant was arrested at his home during the execution of a search warrant, issued after defendant sold crack cocaine to an undercover officer. Therein, police found a small plastic bottle containing 3.8 grams of crack cocaine stowed in a roll of toilet paper, "[a] foot maybe ..." from where defendant was standing. After being cautioned of his rights, defendant was asked if he had "any other illicit substances on the premises...." He replied, "No, that's all right there." A marked $20.00 bill used to buy cocaine from defendant also was found "mixed in with some other currency inside [defendant's] wallet."
An order of nolle prosequi was entered on the weapon charge and the jury found defendant guilty of possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute. This appeal followed the denial of his motion for new trial. Held:
1. In his 20th and 21st enumerations, defendant challenges the constitutionality of his mandatory life sentence imposed under OCGA § 16-13-30(d). The argument that this Code section violates his rights as protected by due process and equal protection is without merit. Cantrell v. State, 217 Ga.App. 641, 642(2), 459 S.E.2d 564. Defendant also renews the argument made in his amended motion for new trial, i.e., that "the mandatory life sentence provisions of [OCGA § 16-13-30(d) ] violate the proportionality and rationality requirements of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Georgia...." The transfer of this appeal by the Supreme Court of Georgia to the Court of Appeals of Georgia is tantamount to a ruling that the mandatory life sentence for recidivist drug sellers is not excessive or disproportionate within the meaning of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Art. I, Sec. I, Par. XVII of the 1983 Georgia Constitution. See Ryals v. State, 215 Ga.App. 51, 52(1), 449 S.E.2d 865. Consequently, defendant's 21st enumeration also is without merit.
2. The trial court did not err in admitting into evidence the marked $20 discovered in defendant's wallet at the time of his arrest, even though defendant's character may have incidentally been placed in issue. Hutson v. State, 216 Ga.App. 100, 101(5), 453 S.E.2d 130. Evidence of defendant's prior convictions for the sale of cocaine was properly admitted to corroborate proof of his intent to distribute as alleged in the indictment. Cole v. State, 216 Ga.App. 68, 70(1), 453 S.E.2d 495; Evans v. State, 209 Ga.App. 606, 607(2), 434 S.E.2d 148. The evidence is sufficient to authorize the jury's verdict that defendant is guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, of possessing cocaine with the intent to distribute as alleged in Count 1 of the indictment. Whitfield v. State, 217 Ga.App. 402, 404(3), 457 S.E.2d 682; Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560.
3. In his sixth, seventh, and eighth enumerations, defendant contends the trial court erred in ruling that defense counsel's peremptory challenges were not racially neutral. We agree.
The transcript of voir dire shows that the State's Attorney, invoking State v. Mayweather, 262 Ga. 727, 425 S.E.2d 659, objected after defense counsel used all six peremptory challenges to strike white venire from the petit jury. In response to defense counsel's explanations, the trial court reseated as jurors three venire struck by the defense after determining that the reasons given were not race neutral, under the following circumstances:
The second and third venire struck by the defense were reseated after the following transpired: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Herrin v. State, A96A0299
...that is required. Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 , 115 S.Ct. 1769, 1771-1772, 131 L.Ed.2d 834, 840 (1995). See Crutchfield v. State, 218 Ga.App. 360, 362(3), 461 S.E.2d 555 (1995). Nothing in the record suggests that the State's concern about the potential jurors' marital and parental backgr......
-
Medina v. State
...three students and a Marine of defendant's race without showing how those concerns were case-related. 6. See Crutchfield v. State, 218 Ga.App. 360, 362(3), 461 S.E.2d 555 (1995). 7. Jones v. State, 240 Ga.App. 339, 342(1), 523 S.E.2d 402 (1999). 8. See Herrin v. State, 221 Ga.App. 356, 359,......
-
Woods v. State
...Woods' intent to distribute in the present matter. The trial court did not err in admitting this evidence. See Crutchfield v. State, 218 Ga.App. 360, 361, 461 S.E.2d 555 (1995) (prior conviction for sale of cocaine permitted as evidence of defendant's intent to distribute 4. Woods contends ......
-
Long v. Hall County Bd. of Com'rs
...to a ruling that any constitutional argument, even if properly raised, is nevertheless without merit. See, e.g., Crutchfield v. State, 218 Ga.App. 360(1), 461 S.E.2d 555. (b) Scottsdale Insurance Company issued a "Comprehensive Law Enforcement Liability Policy," naming as insureds the "Coun......