Sparks v. State

Decision Date14 April 1982
Docket NumberNo. 53130,53130
Citation412 So.2d 754
PartiesFreddie SPARKS v. STATE of Mississippi.
CourtMississippi Supreme Court

Roy O. Parker & Associates, Nora J. Hall, Tupelo, for appellant.

Bill Allain, Atty. Gen. by Robert D. Findley, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Before SMITH, P. J., and WALKER and DAN M. LEE, JJ.

DAN M. LEE, Justice, for the Court:

This is an appeal from the Circuit Court of Lowndes County wherein Freddie Sparks, defendant/appellant, was indicted, tried and convicted for the sale of a controlled substance, to-wit, cocaine. Upon conviction, Sparks was sentenced to serve twenty years in the Mississippi Department of Corrections and fined $10,000. We affirm. Sparks appeals his conviction and assigns the following errors:

1. The lower court erred in finding the appellant guilty in that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.

2. The lower court erred as a matter of law in permitting testimony as to the tape-recorded conversations when the tapes themselves would have been the best evidence.

3. The lower court erred as a matter of law in admitting tape recordings of the telephone conversations of April 5, 1979, where the individual conversing with the state's witness was not identified.

Robert M. Turner and Captain Charles Spillers, agents for the Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics, were involved in an undercover operation in Lowndes County in March and April of 1979. Turner, who was using the name Mike, first contacted appellant by phone on April 1, 1979. After several conversations, appellant advised Turner he could supply one ounce of cocaine for $2500. Turner had no personal contact with the appellant other than by phone. Negotiations fell through on April 4 so agent Turner called the appellant again on April 5. Appellant agreed to contact agent Spillers by telephone at Spillers' Tupelo number.

Spillers was contacted at approximately 8:45 a. m. on April 5. The caller identified himself as Mike's friend. The caller refused to travel from Columbus to Tupelo and also requested that they deal through Mike. It was then agreed that Spillers would travel to Columbus where he would contact the caller at 327-2530 upon his arrival. The phone number given by the caller was listed to an Ernestine Sparks. This conversation was recorded.

When Spillers arrived at agent Turner's home in Columbus, he called the number he had been given and spoke with the same person. The caller refused to meet with Spillers at McDonald's but rather gave him directions to a meeting place and advised Spillers he would be standing outside waiting for him. This conversation was also recorded.

After Spillers' second conversation, he and Turner proceeded to McDonald's on Highway 82, followed by agent Gardner. Turner and Gardner remained at McDonald's while Spillers, following the directions given him by the caller, proceeded to a residence on Hughes Road. Spillers pulled into the driveway of the residence at approximately 10:50 a. m. Appellant and Ernest Holliday were standing in the driveway. A Ford Ranchero registered to appellant was parked under the carport and a Lincoln Continental registered to Ernest Holliday was parked behind appellant's automobile. Appellant walked up to Spillers' window and confirmed the price for an ounce of cocaine at $2500. Spillers asked for a sample of the drug to test, whereupon appellant went into the residence and then returned with a ziplock baggie containing a small quantity of cocaine.

Spillers took the sample and returned to McDonald's where a field test was performed revealing the substance to be cocaine. Spillers and Turner then proceeded back to the residence. Turner was let out of the vehicle at the intersection of Highway 69 and Hughes Road, some two to three hundred yards from the residence. When Spillers arrived at the residence, both vehicles were still in the driveway; however, Ernest Holliday was standing outside alone. Holliday approached Spillers' window, whereupon Spillers indicated he was satisfied with the sample. Holliday then removed a ziplock baggie containing approximately one ounce of cocaine from his back pocket. He confirmed the price at $2500. The substance was weighed with a small hand scale produced by Holliday. Spillers handed Holliday $2500 in official state funds in payment for the substance. Spillers left the residence, picked up Turner and performed another field test which revealed the second baggie to contain cocaine. A subsequent chemical analysis of the drug revealed the substance weighed 32.1 grams.

I. Was the verdict against the overwhelming weight of the evidence?

Appellant contends the evidence presented in the case at bar created a doubt as to his guilt. In Sadler v. State, 407 So.2d 95 (Miss.1981), this Court stated:

Among the alleged errors assigned is that the trial court should have sustained Sadler's motion for a new trial on the ground that the jury verdict was not supported by sufficient credible evidence.

Considering the evidence, as we must, in the light most favorable to the state and accepting as true the evidence supporting or tending to support the verdict, with all inferences supportive of the verdict that reasonably may be drawn therefrom, we find no merit in this contention. Glass v. State, 278 So.2d 384 (Miss.1973). In Spikes v. State, 302 So.2d 250 (Miss.1974), this Court said:

"On appeal, in this situation, in passing upon the sufficiency of evidence to support a verdict, this Court must accept as true the evidence which supports the verdict. Murphree v. State, 228 So.2d 599 (Miss.1969). (302 So.2d at 251)." (407 So.2d at 97)

The state's evidence established that agent Turner arranged a cocaine buy with a subject at a telephone number of 327-2530. This number was listed to an Ernestine Sparks. The caller later contacted agent Spillers. Following the caller's direction, Spillers drove to a residence where he met appellant and Ernest Holliday. Appellant's automobile was parked in the carport. Appellant, upon Spillers' request, retrieved a small amount of cocaine from the residence which was tested by agents Spillers and Turner. When Spillers returned to the residence, Holliday delivered the cocaine. Although appellant was not seen at the time, his vehicle was still parked in the carport.

When the evidence supporting the verdict is accepted as true together with all inferences supportive of the verdict that reasonably may be drawn therefrom, the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict of the jury.

II. Did the trial court err in permitting testimony as to the tape-recorded conversations when the tapes themselves would have been the best evidence?

In Talbert v. State, 347 So.2d 352 (Miss.1977), this Court held the best evidence rule applies only to documentary evidence. 29 Am.Jur.2d, Evidence section 436 (1967), provides in part:

Where proof of a conversation has been of two different kinds, namely, a recording thereof and testimony by witnesses who overheard it, it has been argued that both the recording and the testimony were the best evidence; however, the courts have not relegated either to a secondary position, but have held that both types of evidence are equally competent primary evidence, and that one is not to be excluded because of the existence of the other.

Accord Phillips v. State, 374 So.2d 824 (Miss.1979), overruled on other grounds.

The admission into evidence of the tape-recorded conversations did not render agent...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Winters v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 24 Julio 1985
    ...are equally competent primary evidence, and that one is not to be excluded because of the existence of the other. Sparks v. State, 412 So.2d 754, 756 (Miss.1982); Cf. Turner v. State, 415 So.2d 689, 691 (Miss.1982) (admitting testimony of the underlying transaction which was the subject of ......
  • Gowdy v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 4 Diciembre 1991
    ...(Miss.1990); Williams v. State, 463 So.2d 1064, 1068 (Miss.1985); Johnson v. State, 461 So.2d 1288, 1293-94 (Miss.1984); Sparks v. State, 412 So.2d 754, 756 (Miss.1982). The appeal of John L. Gowdy is a bit closer. Still, the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, refl......
  • Butler v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 31 Diciembre 1991
    ...and, e.g., Gibson v. State, 580 So.2d 739, 741 (Miss.1991); Turner v. State, 573 So.2d 1335, 1337 (Miss.1990); Sparks v. State, 412 So.2d 754, 756 (Miss.1982). Upon his conviction, the Circuit Court of Warren County sentenced him to a term of eighteen years imprisonment within the custody o......
  • Gray v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 20 Septiembre 1989
    ...jury to determine." Estes v. State, 533 So.2d 437, 439 (Miss.1988); Warren v. State, 456 So.2d 735, 738 (Miss.1984) (citing Sparks v. State, 412 So.2d 754 [Miss.1982] and Pickett v. State, 164 Miss. 142, 144 So. 552 [1932] ). In the case at bar, the jury apparently believed that the voice o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT