Roberts v. State
| Decision Date | 20 March 1984 |
| Docket Number | 8 Div. 874 |
| Citation | 451 So.2d 422 |
| Parties | David H. ROBERTS v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
J. Stephen Salter of Groenendyke & Salter, Birmingham, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Martha Gail Ingram, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
David Horace Roberts was indicted and convicted for trafficking in cocaine. Sentence was three years' imprisonment and a fine of $50,000. On appeal Roberts argues that the State's evidence is insufficient to connect him with the cocaine and to support a conviction.
Roberts waived his right to a jury and was tried by a judge. The circumstantial evidence presented by the State is more than adequate to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
As part of a continuing investigation into the cocaine traffic in Morgan County, the residence at 421 Oak Street in Decatur had been under surveillance. Morgan County Deputy Sheriff Walter Price obtained a warrant to search that residence, averring that the residence was "under the domain and control of David Roberts and Mike Partain."
The residence actually belonged to Eleanor Rambridge, Roberts' elderly relative who was confined in a medical facility. Roberts "cared after" her home. The cable television service was listed in Roberts' name. However, Elizabeth Roberts had been declared Ms. Rambridge's legal guardian and was the custodian of the property at 421 Oak Street.
Roberts' family owned and operated the Roberts Catfish Lodge in Hartselle. Roberts worked there and "stayed there quite frequently and a good bit of the time" in an apartment unit at the lodge.
Mike Partain lived at the residence "part-time" and stayed there "maybe a little bit more" than Roberts. There was no testimony that any of Roberts' clothing was found in the residence.
The search warrant was obtained and executed on Monday, April 5, 1982. The investigation of Roberts had been going on since 1978. On either the previous Friday or Saturday evening, Roberts' Cadillac had been observed parked at the residence during a "spot check" by investigating officers. The officers had observed "a lot of people come and go" from the residence.
On Monday morning around 9:30 surveillance was established. At that time Partain's car was observed but Roberts' Cadillac was not. Partain left around 11:00 that morning and did not return.
The officers continued their observation of the residence until 3:30 that afternoon when the surveillance was broken off. When the officers returned fifteen or twenty minutes later, they observed Roberts' Cadillac parked in front. No one saw Roberts enter or leave the residence. The Cadillac was driven away and was stopped within two or three blocks. Roberts was driving. He was given a copy of the search warrant and agreed to return with the officers to the residence.
Roberts opened the door to the residence and "went straight to the location of the marijuana upon entry into the residence." Decatur Police Sergeant Edgar Taylor testified that Roberts walked to an ottoman and said "something to the effect of 'Here it is', or 'I will show you where it is', or 'I will show you what I got.' " Roberts opened the ottoman, revealing a small quantity of marijuana inside.
Deputy Price testified that approximately one-quarter pound of marijuana was found in a bedroom and that Roberts "must have said something about this marijuana being his, too." Drug paraphernalia found in the residence included a "cocaine snorting device", a screen wire of the type "commonly used to sift cocaine", a piece of laboratory equipment commonly used for "freebasing" cocaine, and a hypodermic syringe. Two Valium tablets were found on Roberts. One Methaqualone (Quaalude) tablet was found in a bowl on top of the refrigerator.
The cocaine which is the basis of Roberts' conviction was found by Sergeant Taylor in a "leather briefcase, folder-type thing." While the other officers were searching the residence, Sergeant Taylor stayed with Roberts in the living room. Roberts was sitting on the sofa when Taylor began to examine a leather case on the coffee table. The Sergeant became suspicious when he felt a "lump" inside the case and observed Roberts' reaction. Roberts "had a very vivid reaction and appeared shocked." Taylor testified that Roberts appeared "scared, worried, concerned, maybe even shocked; ... his eyes widened, his lips seemed to tighten a bit." Taylor stated, "I thought there would be something in there just from his reaction."
Taylor opened the leather folder and found $1800 in cash which Roberts admitted was his and for which he was given a receipt. Two clear plastic sandwich bags of cocaine were discovered inside a white envelope with the preprinted address in the lefthand corner of "J.M. Seafood Company, Post Office Box A in Birmingham, and specializing in fresh and frozen seafood, wholesale." This envelope was found inside a pocket of the folder. The total weight of this cocaine was 32.37 grams or 1.4 ounces. Roberts denied any knowledge of the presence of the cocaine.
Also inside the leather folder or briefcase were found insurance policy statements and related documents for Roberts Catfish Restaurant, a premium invoice for the same insurance policy, Roberts' birth certificate, and Roberts' passport application with a departure date of April 2nd--two days after the search was conducted. After the search was completed, Roberts said to the officers, "Ya'll must think I'm a big drug dealer or something."
At trial, Roberts did not present any defense. On appeal, he argues that, although the circumstances are "suspicious", the "objective" facts do not establish his connection with the residence or the leather case.
In reviewing the issue of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, this Court must accept as true the evidence presented by the State, view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, and accord the State all legitimate inferences therefrom. Johnson v. State, 378 So.2d 1164, 1169 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. quashed, Ex parte Johnson, 378 So.2d 1173 (Ala.1979); Cumbo v. State, 368 So.2d 871, 874 (Ala.Cr.App.1978), cert. denied, Ex parte Cumbo, 368 So.2d 877 (Ala.1979).
In a prosecution for the possession of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Grice v. State, 4 Div. 461
...Cumbo v. State, 368 So.2d 871, 874 (Ala.Cr.App.1978), cert. denied, Ex parte Cumbo, 368 So.2d 877 (Ala.1979)." Roberts v. State, 451 So.2d 422 (Ala.Crim.App.1984). Further, "[a] verdict of conviction will not be set aside on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence, unless, allowing all ......
-
Kelley v. State, 1 Div. 384
...of intoxicating beverages. However, this court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, Roberts v. State, 451 So.2d 422 (Ala.Cr.App.1984), and where there is legal evidence from which the jury could by fair inference find the accused guilty, this will not distu......
-
Agee v. State
...Cumbo v. State, 368 So.2d 871, 874 (Ala.Cr.App.1978), cert. denied, Ex parte Cumbo, 368 So.2d 877 (Ala.1979)." Roberts v. State, 451 So.2d 422 (Ala.Crim.App.1984). Further, "[a] verdict of conviction will not be set aside on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence, unless, allowing all ......
-
Helton v. State, 1 Div. 820
...on whatever permissible inferences it chooses to draw.' Gullatt v. State, 409 So.2d 466, 472 (Ala.Cr.App.1981)." Roberts v. State, 451 So.2d 422, 425 (Ala.Cr.App.1984). Here, there was legal evidence from which the factfinder could have, by fair inference, found the accused guilty. Conseque......