German v. State, 3 Div. 451
| Decision Date | 09 September 1986 |
| Docket Number | 3 Div. 451 |
| Citation | 500 So.2d 478 |
| Parties | Shermaine GERMAN v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Perry O. Hooper, Sr., John C. Cason, and Thomas J. Travers, Montgomery, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Gerrilyn V. Grant, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant, Shermaine German, was convicted of trafficking in cannabis, in violation of § 20-2-80, Code of Alabama 1975. He was sentenced to 21 years' imprisonment.
Appellant's conviction arises out of the following facts. The Montgomery Fire Department responded to a reported fire at a residence in Montgomery, Alabama. After the fire was extinguished, Lt. John Miller of the fire department conducted the customary and routine search of the building. During his search Miller discovered two plastic bags containing a green, leafy substance.
Miller notified the fire officer in charge at the scene of his discovery. The substance was turned over to the Montgomery Police Department. It was determined that the substance was 26.8 pounds of marijuana.
Investigators with the police department recovered from the scene other items connecting possession of the premises and German. A receipt from the Federal District Court for the Middle District of Alabama bearing the name Shermaine German, a health insurance card in the name of Shermaine German, and a subpeona from the Federal District Court in the name of Shermaine German were found.
Appellant argues that his conviction should be reversed because of insufficient evidence to establish constructive possession of the marijuana. "In a prosecution for unlawful possession of narcotics, it is not necessary to prove manucaption but constructive possession may be shown...." Jones v. State, 432 So.2d 5, 6 (Ala.Cr.App.1983).
"Constructive possession can be shown where the controlled substance was found on the premises controlled by the defendant, and guilty knowledge may be established by the surrounding facts and circumstances." Whitehead v. State, 429 So.2d 641 (Ala.Cr.App.1982); McCord v. State, 373 So.2d 1242 (Ala.Cr.App.1979).
"When constructive possession is relied upon, the state must prove knowledge of the prohibited substance beyond a reasonable doubt." Grubbs v. State, 462 So.2d 995 (Ala.Cr.App.1984); Yarbough v. State, 405 So.2d 721 (Ala.1981).
Lt. Miller testified that appellant on several occasions referred to the premises as his house. At trial Miller quoted German as saying:
" "Q: To my house? Is that what he said?
Miller further testified:
T.R. Shanks, fingerprint examiner for the Montgomery Police Department, testified that a latent fingerprint found on one of the plastic bags discovered in the house was appellant's.
"Where ... the presence of the accused at the scene is established by both direct and circumstantial evidence, and the evidence of the accused's knowledge of the presence of the prohibited substance is shown together with other incriminating evidence, the issue of the defendant's guilt should be submitted to the jury." Moore v. State, 457 So.2d 981, 987 (Ala.Cr.App.1984).
We find that there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find constructive possession beyond a reasonable doubt.
Appellant maintains that the sentence of 21 years imposed by the trial court was so onerous as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kelley v. State, 1 Div. 384
...the trial court's decision absent a showing of abuse of discretion. Harris v. State, 500 So.2d 1292 (Ala.Cr.App.1986); German v. State, 500 So.2d 478 (Ala.Cr.App.1986); Tice v. State, 491 So.2d 1065 (Ala.Cr.App.1986); Cade v. State, 491 So.2d 1075 (Ala.Cr.App.1986). Furthermore, Solem v. He......
-
Baker v. City of Huntsville
...463 U.S. 277, 103 S.Ct. 3001, 77 L.Ed.2d 637 (1983), which applies to sentences of life imprisonment without parole. German v. State, 500 So.2d 478, 480 (Ala.Cr.App.1986). II The appellant argues that the trial court erred to reversal in denying his motion for a new trial because, he says, ......
-
Campbell v. State, 8 Div. 110
...However, we find that the State did establish constructive possession of the cannabis found in the thermos. See German v. State, 500 So.2d 478 (Ala.Crim.App.1986). (This court found constructive possession was established where the accused's latent fingerprint was found on the packet of can......
-
Ex parte Fletcher
...there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that Fletcher was in constructive possession of the cocaine. See German v. State, 500 So.2d 478 (Ala.Crim.App.1986) (constructive possession can be established by the fact that cocaine is found on the premises controlled by the defendant, a......