Stevens v. State, 171S3

• Decision Date: 18 November 1971
• Docket Number: No. 171S3,171S3
• Citation: 275 N.E.2d 12,257 Ind. 386
• Parties: Donald E. STEVENS, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

Page 12

275 N.E.2d 12

257 Ind. 386

Donald E. STEVENS, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee.

No. 171S3.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Nov. 18, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 19, 1972.

Robert J. Fink, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Theodore L. Sendak, Atty. Gen., David H. Kreider, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.

DeBRULER, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction for possession of narcotics equipment in violation of I.C. 1971, 35--24--1--2, being Burns § 10--3520(c). The trial was without jury in Marion County Criminal Court, Division Two and appellant was sentenced to one to five years in prison and fined $1.00 and costs.

The affidavit read in pertinent part as follows:

'DONALD E. STEVENS on or about the 7 day of May, A.D. 1970, at and in the County of Marion in the State of Indiana, did then and there unlawfully and feloniously, with intent to unlawfully administer narcotic drugs, did possess and have under his control certain instruments, to-wit: a needle, syringe and cooker, which said instruments were then and there adapted for the use of narcotic drugs by injection in a human being, then and there being. * * *'

Under this affidavit appellee was required to introduce evidence on each of the following elements: (1) appellant had possession of certain instruments, namely, a syringe, needle and cooker; (2) these instruments were adapted for the use of narcotic drugs by injection in a human being; and, (3) appellant possessed those instruments with the intent to unlawfully administer narcotic drugs.

Appellant's contention on appeal is that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the trial court finding that appellant possessed the instruments with intent to unlawfully administer narcotic drugs. In reviewing the allegation of insufficient evidence this Court will not weigh the evidence nor resolve questions of credibility of witnesses, but will look to that evidence and the reasonable inferences therefrom which support the finding of the trial court. Asher v. State (1969), Ind., 244 N.E.2d 89. The conviction will be affirmed if from that viewpoint there is evidence of probative value from which the trier of fact could reasonably infer that the appellant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Smith v. State (1970), Ind., 260 N.E.2d 558.

The evidence which tends to support the trial court finding is as follows: On May 7, 1970, appellant was arrested in a downtown store for shoplifting. Officer Minor of the Indianapolis Police Department testified that when he arrived on the scene he searched appellant and found a syringe, two needles, a bottle cap in appellant's pants and coat pockets.

Officer Brenton, Indianapolis Police Department, testified that he had been in the Narcotics Section of the department for seven months, had received training at the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs training school in Chicago, Illinois, had since then attended three seminars on narcotic drugs sponsored by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, and had participated in numerous arrests for narcotics violations. Brenton said that the syringe, needle and bottle cap were called an 'outfit' by narcotics users and they were used to inject narcotic drugs into the human body. Brenton further testified that he saw appellant the morning following his arrest and examined appellant's arm:

'Q. And, will you tell the Court the results of your examination?

A. Checked his arms, and he had...