Ponder v. State, 6 Div. 631
| Decision Date | 23 April 1985 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 631 |
| Citation | 472 So.2d 691 |
| Parties | Floyd Jay PONDER, alias v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Robert A. Sapp, Sr., Cullman, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and J. Anthony McLain and James F. Hampton, Sp. Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellee.
On August 5, 1983, Floyd Jay Ponder was indicted for the intentional murder of one Billy Rae Ramey, in violation of § 13A-6-2, Code of Alabama. The case went to trial and the appellant was found "guilty of murder" and sentenced to life imprisonment. His conviction was reversed by this court in Ponder v. State, 451 So.2d 1382 (Ala.Crim.App.1984).
On retrial, the appellant was again found "guilty of murder" and sentenced to life imprisonment.
At approximately 10:00 p.m. on the night of June 21, 1983, the appellant and the victim went to the residence of the victim's brother, Donald Ramey. They told Donald Ramey that they came to bring him a drink and they had a half-gallon bottle of whiskey. Both the victim and the appellant were intoxicated. At this point, they went into the master bedroom where they found Jane Ramey, Donald's wife, and Stacy Mahan, Donald's stepdaughter. The adults began to drink the whiskey. Donald Ramey went to the store to get some cokes with which to chase the whiskey, and when he returned, the drinking continued.
During this time, the appellant boasted about how tough he was and that he could "whip" both the victim and Donald Ramey. At one point he pulled his knife out and passed it around.
The victim, who was not a big drinker, became sick and his brother took him outside. When they came back inside the victim passed out on the bed. A short while later the appellant wanted to go home and became belligerent when Donald Ramey told him to leave without the victim. The appellant then left the house and Donald Ramey followed him outside. Once outside, the appellant pulled a knife on Donald Ramey and threatened him. Donald Ramey ran for a while and, when he started back to the house, he saw his daughter who told him that the appellant had hurt the victim. When Donald Ramey got back to the house, he saw the appellant driving away in his car.
Jane Ramey testified that, soon after the appellant and her husband went outside, she heard footsteps. She assumed that it was her husband. She was still sitting on the bed next to the victim when she heard a thud. She looked and saw the appellant's fist in the middle of the victim's chest. She told her daughter to run and then the appellant left.
After Donald Ramey saw his brother was hurt, he went to a neighbor's house to call an ambulance and the police. The victim was pronounced dead at the hospital.
After the appellant left the Ramey residence he went to his brother-in-law's house. James Kenneth Boyd testified that the appellant said he was in trouble and needed money. Boyd gave the appellant $1.00 and he left.
Next, the appellant went to Jerry Gilbreath's house. He told Gilbreath that he had whipped three people and cut two people. He asked Gilbreath to take him to his sister's. The appellant left his car at Gilbreath's. On the way to the appellant's sister's house, a sheriff's car passed. The appellant asked Gilbreath if the sheriff's car had stopped.
When the appellant got to his sister's house, he said he had been in a fight and asked to borrow her car. The appellant was arrested shortly thereafter.
The appellant contends that a knife [i.e., allegedly the murder weapon], which was found in the appellant's car, should not have been admitted into evidence because the State failed to establish a proper chain of custody.
Ed Lee, an investigator with the Cullman County Sheriff's Office, testified that he removed this knife from the appellant's car during the early morning hours of June 22, 1983. He put his markings on the knife and placed it in a sealed evidence bag. The next day he gave this evidence bag to Dr. Aguilar of the Department of Forensic Sciences.
Dr. Aguilar stated that, after he received the evidence bag from Lee, he opened it, examined the knife and resealed the bag and gave it to Rodger Morrison.
Morrison, a criminalist with a specialty in forensic serology, testified that, when he received the evidence bag, he unsealed it and performed some tests on the knife. He then put the knife back into the bag and gave it to Dennis Spradlin of the Cullman County Sheriff's Department.
The appellant now asserts that his case should be reversed because Spradlin failed to testify that, after receiving the bag containing the knife from Morrison, it was in his possession until he brought it to court for this trial. We do not agree.
Sims v. State, 428 So.2d 162 (Ala.Crim.App.1982), cert. denied, 428 So.2d 162 (Ala.1983).
Immediately prior to the knife's admission into evidence, Lee testified that the knife was in the same condition as when he removed it from the appellant's car. The appellant does not contend that the knife was altered or tampered with in any way and it is not necessary for the State to rebut this contention. Willis v. State, 441 So.2d 1030 (Ala.Crim.App.1983); Tate v. State, 435 So.2d 190 (Ala.Crim.App.1983).
Therefore, we find that the testimony concerning the chain of custody with regard to the knife was sufficient to justify its admission into evidence.
The appellant asserts that, due to his intoxication on the night of the murder, he was unable to form the requisite intent necessary to commit murder. Therefore, he alleges that his motions for judgment of acquittal and for a new trial were improperly denied.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dill v. State
... ... Wainwright, 778 F.2d 623, 629, n. 6 (11th Cir.1985)) ... " '[C]ounsel in the trial of any ... (emphasis supplied.) See also Ponder v. State, 472 So.2d 691 (Ala.Crim.App.1985); Livingston v. State, 419 ... ...