State v. Crawford
| Decision Date | 26 February 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. SC 84071.,SC 84071. |
| Citation | 68 S.W.3d 406 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Shelby A. CRAWFORD, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Bruce W. Simon, Kansas City, for Appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Lisa M. Sutherland, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Philip M. Koppe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, for Respondent.
1
Shelby A. Crawford was convicted of two counts of the class B felony of possession with intent to distribute, deliver or sell marijuana and cocaine, in violation of section 195.211.2 The court sentenced Crawford to seven years' imprisonment in the department of corrections on each count, to be served concurrently. Crawford appeals. This Court finding no error, the judgment is affirmed.
Crawford waived his right to a jury. The following evidence was presented to the court: On March 12, 1999, the Belton police executed a search warrant at 16 Jasmine Street in Belton. The telephone rang during the search. One of the officers answered the telephone. A confidential informant told the officer that a person identified as "Dray" "was coming out to that trailer to deliver some drugs." (Emphasis added.)
A "red Firebird" drove out to the residence at least twice a week, at which time an occupant of the residence would walk to the car and then return not more than ten minutes later. Approximately fifteen minutes after the telephone call, a red Pontiac Firebird pulled up. Crawford was driving the vehicle. Two other passengers were in the vehicle. Crawford got out of the Firebird, walked up to the house, and identified himself as "Dray" to the officer who opened the door. Crawford was arrested.
A police K-9 unit was called to the scene to search the outside of the car. The K-9 dog scratched at the driver-side door, which indicated to the officers that there were narcotics in the vehicle. During a search after a warrant was obtained, the officers found, in the hub of the steering wheel of the car, a bag that held seven individually packaged smaller bags of marijuana, another bag containing two small bundles of cocaine base, and over $1,000 in cash. The serial numbers on one of the bills (a $20 bill) matched those that the officers had earlier used to purchase narcotics in a "controlled buy" at the 16 Jasmine Street residence. No drugs were found on any of the passengers, on Crawford, or elsewhere in the car.
Crawford did not present any evidence at trial. He contends there was insufficient evidence to prove he consciously possessed the drugs found in the vehicle.
When reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court accepts as true all of the evidence favorable to the state, including all favorable inferences drawn from the evidence. State v. Grim, 854 S.W.2d 403, 405 (Mo. banc 1993). All evidence and inferences to the contrary are disregarded. Id. This Court does not weigh the evidence. Appellate review is limited to determining whether there is sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror might have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Dulany, 781 S.W.2d 52, 55 (Mo. banc 1989).
In a case tried without a jury, the trial court's findings have the force and effect of the verdict of a jury. Rule 27.01(b). The credibility and weight of testimony are for the fact-finder to determine. Dulany at 55. The fact-finder may believe all, some, or none of the testimony of a witness when considered with the facts, circumstances and other testimony in the case. Id.
Crawford contends that there was insufficient evidence to show an adequate "nexus" between him and the controlled substances found in the steering wheel of the car he was driving to support either actual or constructive possession of the materials. Crawford argues the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Wood
...historically been the province of the jury. "The credibility and weight of testimony are for the fact-finder to determine." State v. Crawford, 68 S.W.3d 406, 408 (Mo. banc 2002) (emphasis added). It is the jury’s task to "determine the credibility of the witnesses, resolve conflicts in test......
-
In re the Adoption of C.M.B.R.
...and requests plain error review. Hearsay admitted without objection may be considered as evidence by the trier of fact. State v. Crawford, 68 S.W.3d 406, 408 (Mo. banc 2002); State v. Goodwin, 43 S.W.3d 805, 818 (Mo. banc 2001); State v. Thomas, 440 S.W.2d 467, 470 (Mo.1969). As Mother did ......
-
State v. Liberty
...accepts as true all of the evidence favorable to the state, including all favorable inferences drawn from the evidence.” State v. Crawford, 68 S.W.3d 406, 407 (Mo. banc 2002). “All evidence and inferences to the contrary are disregarded.” Id. at 408.B. Conviction for Promoting Child Pornogr......
-
State v. Murphy
...hearsay that goes in the record without objection may be considered by the fact-finder in determining the facts.” State v. Crawford, 68 S.W.3d 406, 408 (Mo. banc 2002). 5. We note that the three maps introduced by Defendant are inconsistent with each other as to the exact boundary line for ......