Jordan v. State
| Decision Date | 27 June 1967 |
| Docket Number | 1 Div. 187 |
| Citation | 44 Ala.App. 21,201 So.2d 63 |
| Parties | Robert E. JORDAN v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Thos. M. Haas and John Coleman, Mobile, for appellant.
MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen., and Robt. F. Miller, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The indictment charged that defendant 'unlawfully did possess pentobarbital sodium, a salt of barbital, against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama.'
The defendant was by a jury convicted of this offense. His sentence was fixed at two years in the state penitentiary.
For the state, John M. Sheppard, a police detective of Mobile, testified he and his partner, a detective named Baxter, saw defendant staggering out in the driveway of the Rogers Taxicab stand and service station at the corner of Bay Bridge Road and Telegraph, in Mobile County. The officers drove around the building and saw that defendant was coming out toward the street. The officers stopped the car and got out. Defendant was two or three feet from the pumps. His eyes were half closed and glassy looking and he 'was rearing up and talking loud.' The officers arrested him and before they put him in the car, 'shook him down and took a match box out of his front pocket.' The match box contained 'some yellow capsules.' The match box and contents were turned over to Dr. Nelson Grubbs. After defendant was taken to the police station three capsules and two tablets were taken from his front pocket. These were delivered to Dr. Grubbs at the same time the match box was given to him. These items were introduced in evidence as State's Exhibits 1 and 2. There was no labeling on either of these exhibits.
Dr. Nelson Grubbs a state toxicologist, testified he submitted the particular items to a chemical evaluation test. His examination disclosed that Exhibit One contained a barbiturate, pentobarbital, which is a salt of barbital. The three capsules, Exhibit 2, contained the same substance as Exhibit 1. The two tablets contained Amphetamine Sulfate. On cross examination Dr. Grubbs stated that all the items submitted to him were barbiturates.
It is apparent from the record that defendant was arrested for a violation of either Section 120 or 120(1) of Title 14, Code 1940. The search of defendant's person being incident to a lawful arrest, there was no error in the overruling of defendant's objections to the admission of the testimony concerning the search or the items found on his person.
The evidence was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cassell v. State
...the State's evidence. Tatum v. State, 32 Ala.App. 128, 22 So.2d 350; Starnes v. State, 30 Ala.App. 156, 2 So.2d 333; Jordan v. State, 44 Ala.App. 21, 201 So.2d 63. It therefore follows that the arrest of the appellant at Ballew's Truck Stop and Restaurant was proper, and the search of his p......
-
Pryor v. State, 1 Div. 147
...617, 197 So.2d 763; Thompson v. State,44 Ala.App. 414, 211 So.2d 505; Brandies v. State, 44 Ala.App. 648, 219 So.2d 404; Jordan v. State, 44 Ala.App. 21, 201 So.2d 63. Isonipecaine and methadone hydrochloride are synthetic narcotics and are strong hard drugs. The unlawful possession of thes......
-
Maples v. State
...cause for believing defendant at the time was engaged in the commission of a public offense and that the arrest was lawful. Jordan v. State, Ala.App., 201 So.2d 63. In Burton v. United States, 272 F.2d 473, cert. denied 362 U.S. 951, 80 S.Ct. 863, 4 L.Ed.2d 869, and Vincent v. United States......