Siercks v. State
Decision Date | 08 November 2013 |
Docket Number | CR–12–0874. |
Citation | 154 So.3d 1085 |
Parties | Robert Swan SIERCKS v. STATE of Alabama. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Jamie Morgan Stephens, Huntsville, for appellant.
Luther Strange, atty. gen., and Stephen N. Dodd, asst. atty. gen., for appellee.
Robert Swan Siercks was convicted of unlawful possession of a controlled substance, cocaine, see § 13A–12–212, Ala.Code 1975. He was sentenced, as a habitual offender with three prior felony convictions, to 15 years' imprisonment.
The evidence adduced at trial indicated the following. On November 18, 2011, around 3 p.m., Steven Graham, a patrol officer and field-training officer with the Huntsville Police Department, and Christopher Edwards, a rookie patrol officer with the Huntsville Police Department, were on patrol when Officer Graham saw a 1992 Oldsmobile automobile stopped at a traffic light at an intersection. The driver of the vehicle was not wearing a seatbelt. When the traffic light turned green, Officer Graham followed the vehicle, turned on his emergency lights, and executed a traffic stop. When the vehicle stopped, the officers got out of the patrol car and Officer Graham approached the driver's side of the vehicle, while Officer Edwards approached the passenger side. Siercks was driving the vehicle and a woman was in the front passenger seat.
Officer Graham asked Siercks for his driver's license, vehicle registration, and insurance information. Siercks informed Officer Graham that he had no identification with him. The female passenger also said that she had no identification with her. Officer Graham stated that he then asked Siercks to get out of the vehicle. According to Officer Graham, it is standard procedure to detain a vehicle occupant who has no identification until the occupant's identity can be determined. The female passenger was also asked to get out of the vehicle.
When Siercks opened the driver's side door and started to get out of the vehicle, Officer Graham saw “in plain view between the door and the driver's seat ... a small white rock of cocaine.” (R. 94.) Graham then conducted a patdown of Siercks, handcuffed Siercks, and put Siercks in the back of his patrol car. After Siercks was secured, Officer Graham pointed out to Officer Edwards the location of the white rock, confiscated the rock, and radioed for narcotics officers to come to the scene. Subsequently, Officer Graham conducted a field test on the white rock. Based on the results of the field test, Officer Graham arrested Siercks for possession of cocaine. Officer Graham also wrote Siercks a traffic ticket for failing to wear a seatbelt. Because no illegal narcotics were found on the passenger side of the vehicle, the female passenger was released. Officer Graham testified that he determined that the vehicle Siercks was driving was registered to a woman named Sally Hawkins, who lived at 3834 Melody Road, the same address where Siercks lived.
Although the rock was later submitted to the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences (“DFS”) for testing, no evidence was presented regarding the results of that testing. However, Officer Graham testified that he had been a police officer since 2007 and that he had made some 500 drug arrests during his career, including approximately 200 arrests involving cocaine. Officer Graham said that in addition to his training at the police academy, he had attended a four-day training class involving drug detection generally1 as well as a week-long training class dedicated to methamphetamine. Officer Graham stated that the Huntsville Police Department has a procedure for submitting confiscated narcotics to DFS and that, in none of the approximately 200 arrests for cocaine he had made in his career, did DFS return a report indicating that the substance was not cocaine. Based on his experience, Officer Graham said, it was immediately apparent to him that the white rock he found in the vehicle driven by Siercks was crack cocaine. Officer Graham also identified the rock he confiscated at trial, and the rock was introduced into evidence by the defense.
On cross-examination, Officer Graham stated that he did not notice Siercks or the female passenger make any strange movements as he was executing the traffic stop and that there was nothing that would have stopped Siercks from throwing the rock into the backseat before he stopped the vehicle. Officer Graham also said that when he patted Siercks down he did not find any narcotics on his person. Officer Graham stated that he did not question either Siercks or the female passenger about the rock of cocaine he found but that the narcotics officer who came to the scene “did all that.” (R. 116.)
Officer Edwards testified that he observed Officer Graham approach the driver's side of the vehicle, get Siercks out of the vehicle, and pat Siercks down. After Siercks was detained, Officer Edwards went to the driver's side of the vehicle and saw “[w]hat appeared to be a rock of crack cocaine ... next to the driver's seat in between the seat and the window.” (R. 130.) Officer Edwards admitted that the traffic stop of Siercks occurred only one week after he had graduated from the police academy, but he said that he had been trained in the police academy to identify narcotics, including crack cocaine. Officer Edwards said that, even as a rookie, he had no doubt that the substance in the vehicle was crack cocaine.
After both sides rested and the trial court instructed the jury on the applicable principles of law, the jury convicted Siercks of unlawful possession of cocaine as charged in the indictment. This appeal followed.
On appeal, Siercks contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal made at the close of the State's case and his motion for a new trial because, he says, the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction. Specifically, Siercks argues, as he did at trial, that the State failed to prove: (1) that the substance seized from the vehicle was, in fact, cocaine; and (2) that he was in constructive possession of the cocaine.
Gavin v. State, 891 So.2d 907, 974 (Ala.Crim.App.2003).
Cumbo v. State, 368 So.2d 871, 874–75 (Ala.Crim.App.1978).
First, Siercks argues that the State failed to prove that the substance seized from the vehicle was cocaine. While recognizing that scientific testing is not necessarily required to establish the nature of a controlled...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hall v. State
...§ 13A–12–281 is ‘mandatory and jurisdictional, and [that] the failure to impose [it] renders a sentence illegal.’ Siercks v. State , 154 So.3d 1085, 1094 (Ala.Crim.App.2013). However, it is also well settled that ‘ "[a] defendant's sentence is determined by the law in effect at the time of ......
-
Bishop v. State
...R. Crim. P. This Court noted that the assessment had been described as both "mandatory" and "jurisdictional" in Siercks v. State, 154 So. 3d 1085, 1094 (Ala. Crim. App. 2013), and other cases. This Court in Hall overruled those cases because they deviated from Alabama law. This Court disavo......
-
Hawk v. State
...1975, and the fee mandated by the Alabama Forensic Services Trust Fund, § 36–18–7, Ala.Code 1975, were not imposed. In Siercks v. State, 154 So.3d 1085 (Ala.Crim.App.2013), when the trial court failed to impose these fines, we remanded the case for the trial court to impose them. We held:“S......
-
Siercks v. State (Ex parte Siercks), 1130847.
...[Steven] Graham saw ‘in plain view between the door and the driver's seat ... a small white rock of cocaine.’ ” Siercks v. State, 154 So.3d 1085, 1087 (Ala.Crim.App.2013). After field-testing the substance, Officer Graham arrested Siercks for unlawful possession of cocaine. When the jury re......