Reid v. State
| Decision Date | 11 January 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 44381,44381 |
| Citation | 474 S.W.2d 702 |
| Parties | Pamela Martella REID, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Charles W. Tessmer, Dallas (On Appeal Only), Ronald L. Goranson, Dallas (On Appeal Only), for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., John B. Tolle, and Edgar A. Mason, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
DALLY, Commissioner.
The offense is possession of marihuana; the punishment, five years imprisonment.
Appellant's first ground of error complains that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction.
This case was submitted to the jury as one based upon circumstantial evidence and on the theory that the appellant was a principal.
Apartment 101 at 716 North Franklin Street in Oak Cliff, rented by Danny Woodall and his wife, was placed under surveillance for approximately an hour and a half on October 22, 1969, by Officer B. T. Zapata of the Dallas Police Force, as a result of a conversation he had had with an informant earlier that day. Based on the information he had received, and Officer Zapata's observations of 'a lot of traffic coming to and from this apartment' a search warrant was obtained. Zapata and Officers Fowler and Landers returned to the apartment to execute the warrant. They knocked on the door; there being no response, the officers opened the apartment with the key they had obtained from the apartment manager. Upon entering they found Jack Kinkle and Elaine Woodall in the living room; Danny James Woodall and Victor Vining were in the bedroom. Appellant was not present.
A search of the bedroom closet revealed a brown paper sack in which there were eighteen separately wrapped 'baggies' that contained a green vegetable substance which was proved to be marihuana. In a dresser drawer in the bedroom was found a red purse which contained two books of cigarette papers, a catheter tube, cotton, needles, a 'nurse's aide' nameplate of Elaine Cumberland (Woodall), a plastic 'baggie' containing stocks of marihuana, three syringes, needles and a cigarette roller.
The officers also discovered a brown wooden cigar box on a shelf in the dressing room closet. It contained, among other things, seeds and particles of marihuana, a pipe, cigarette papers and a Texas operator's license issued in the name of Pamela Martella.
The officers' testimony revealed that the appellant arrived at the apartment 'roughly fifteen or twenty minutes' after they had begun the search and after the discovery of the marihuana.
It is the State's position that the evidence before us 'presents a somewhat stronger circumstantial evidence case than Culmore v. State, 447 S.W.2d 915 (Tex.Crim.App.1969).' We cannot agree. Reliance is had upon the fact that appellant's 'driver's' license was found in one of the boxes containing marihuana that was discovered before she arrived; that appellant did visit the apartment late on the night in question; and that the appellant had needlemarks on her arm, which were 'recent', showing her to be a user of injectible narcotics.
The record reveals that Officer Zapata testified that the number of needlemarks was 'possibly one or two' and that by 'recent' it was meant that the needlemark(s) had been made 'within one week'. The existence of 'possibly one or two' needlemarks made 'within one week' is of no probative value in establishing appellant's possession of marihuana. Contrary to the State's argument this does not prove that appellant was a user of injectible...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hughes v. State
...of the accused at the scene of a crime does not of itself justify drawing an inference that he participated therein. Reid v. State, 474 S.W.2d 702 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Glenn v. United States, 271 F.2d 880 (6th Cir., 1959). Mere presence or even knowledge of an offense does not make one a prin......
-
Payne v. State
...or possessed does not, standing alone, justify a finding of joint possession. Kinkle v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 474 S.W.2d 704; Reid v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 474 S.W.2d 702; Culmore v. State, Tex.Cr.App.,447 S.W.2d 915; Martinez v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 266, 340 S.W.2d 56. 'Possession means more t......
-
Harrison v. State, 53609
...v. State, supra; Hausman v. State, 480 S.W.2d 721 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Kinkle v. State, 474 S.W.2d 704 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Reid v. State, 474 S.W.2d 702 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Culmore v. State, 447 S.W.2d 915 (Tex.Cr.App.1969). Whether the theory of prosecution is sole or joint possession, the evi......
-
Bucklin v. State
...some discussion. Ayres v. State, 570 S.W.2d 926 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Hernandez v. State, 517 S.W.2d 782 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Reid v. State, 474 S.W.2d 702 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Williams v. State, 498 S.W.2d 340 In Ayres v. State, supra, the Austin police entered a house where they found two people......