Stokes v. State, No. 49A02-0212-CR-1081.

Docket NºNo. 49A02-0212-CR-1081.
Citation801 N.E.2d 1263
Case DateJanuary 22, 2004
CourtCourt of Appeals of Indiana

801 N.E.2d 1263

Gerald L. STOKES, Appellant-Defendant,
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff

No. 49A02-0212-CR-1081.

Court of Appeals of Indiana.

January 22, 2004.

Transfer Denied April 23, 2004.


801 N.E.2d 1266
Eric K. Koselke, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellant

Steve Carter, Attorney General of Indiana, Michael Gene Worden, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.

801 N.E.2d 1264

801 N.E.2d 1265
OPINION

RILEY, Judge.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Appellant-Defendant, Gerald L. Stokes (Stokes), appeals his convictions for Count I, conspiracy to commit dealing in cocaine, a Class A felony, Ind.Code § 35-48-4-1, and Count II, dealing in cocaine or narcotics, a Class A felony, I.C. § 35-48-4-1.

We affirm.

ISSUES

Stokes raises two issues on appeal, which we restate as follows:

(1) Whether the trial court erred by allowing the jury to view exhibits after deliberations began; and

(2) Whether there was sufficient evidence to sustain his convictions.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On August 15, 2002, Indianapolis Police Department officers and detectives (collectively, "IPD officers") conducted an investigation for illegal drug activity in the 4300 block of North Crittenden Street. The IPD officers focused their investigation on the residences at 4340 and 4346 North Crittenden Street.1 Indianapolis Police Department Detective Thomas Stout (Detective Stout) obtained permission from the resident across the street and in between 4344 and 4346 North Crittenden Street to set up video surveillance in that residence. From this vantage point across the street from the targeted residences, Detective Stout videotaped any suspicious activity he observed in the area of those residences, and he informed the other IPD officers by police radio as to what he observed.

During his surveillance, Detective Stout observed Adrian Riggs (Riggs)2 leave the porch at 4340 North Crittenden when a white female approached the residence. Riggs then walked with the female into the side door at 4346 North Crittenden. Shortly thereafter, when the white female exited from the side door at 4346 North Crittenden, her left hand was cupped as if she was holding something. Detective Stout further noticed Riggs twisting a plastic baggie into a knot.

Detective Stout observed Stokes sitting on the porch at 4340 North Crittenden and talking with an unidentified person. A heavy-set black female wearing a loose fitting blue shirt, striped pants, and a blue

801 N.E.2d 1267
floppy hat pulled up to the 4340 North Crittenden residence in a car, with an unidentified male in the passenger seat. The woman exited the car and approached Stokes. Stokes and the woman walked to the back corner on the side of the 4344 North Crittenden residence. Once Stokes and the woman were in this location, Detective Stout could no longer view them. However, within a couple of seconds, Stokes reappeared. Detective Stout observed Stokes bring his left hand up to his mouth and biting off a piece of something

Next, Riggs walked up to Stokes and stood next to him. An unidentified black male then approached Riggs. The man held out his right hand while Riggs was doing something with his hands. Thereafter, Riggs and the unidentified man made a hand-to-hand exchange, with Riggs putting something in the man's hand and the man in turn giving something to Riggs. When Riggs turned around, Detective Stout observed him twisting a plastic baggie.

In the meantime, Stokes went back into the area where he initially went with the black female in the blue floppy hat. When Stokes came back into the vicinity where Riggs was, the two men had a verbal exchange. Riggs handed something to Stokes and he placed it in his pocket. Detective Stout then observed Stokes counting money, with Riggs standing immediately behind him. Afterwards, Riggs and Stokes returned to the porch at the 4340 North Crittenden residence. The car with the black female, the black male, and one other unidentified person drove away.

Later that evening, the black female in the blue floppy hat returned alone to the 4340 North Crittenden residence. As she approached Stokes, he walked off of the porch to meet her. Stokes and the woman met in the area between 4344 North Crittenden and 4346 North Crittenden and walked to the back in between both residences. Stokes and the woman were out of Detective Stout's view for approximately twenty-nine seconds before they reappeared. When they came back into the view of Detective Stout, he observed the woman lift her T-shirt and put something inside of her bra. Stokes then returned to the porch at 4340 North Crittenden, while the woman drove away. Detective Stout notified other IPD officers regarding his observations. Following a traffic stop of the car driven by the woman, Indianapolis Police Department Detective Kincaid (Detective Kincaid) retrieved crack cocaine from inside the woman's bra.

Shortly thereafter, Stokes walked off the porch of 4340 North Crittenden and met with two men in the area between 4344 and 4346 North Crittenden. The men walked from the other half of the double house where Detective Stout was videotaping the transactions, which was across the street from 4344 North Crittenden.3 Stokes and one of the men walked to the rear of 4346 North Crittenden where Detective Stout observed Stokes reach up to the windowsill by the side door and retrieve a white object smaller than a tennis ball.4 Stokes then went directly to the side door of 4346 North Crittenden,

801 N.E.2d 1268
opened the door, and entered the residence together with the other black male. Stokes and the man were inside the residence for approximately one minute and twenty-nine seconds before Detective Stout observed them leave the residence. The man had his left hand in his pocket and Stokes had his right hand cupped as if he was holding something inside of his hand. Stokes then returned to the porch at 4340 North Crittenden while both of the men returned to the other half of the double where Detective Stout was located.

When the IPD officers arrived on the scene, Stokes and Riggs were sitting on the porch of 4340 North Crittenden playing a board game. As the IPD officers approached the residence, Riggs immediately stood up and quickly walked into the residence of 4340 North Crittenden. The IPD officers were given permission to enter the house and did so to apprehend Riggs. As the police searched for Riggs inside of the residence, they found the toilet running in the bathroom. The police found Riggs in the back bedroom. Riggs gave the police a false name when questioned. The IPD officers found approximately $30.00 in Riggs' front left pocket. The IPD officer searched Stokes and found $169.00 on him in small bills.

The IPD officers searched around the porch at 4340 North Crittenden and in between the residences but did not find anything. The IPD officers then entered the side door of the vacant residence at 4346 North Crittenden and briefly searched inside the residence. The IPD officers observed a large number of plastic baggies inside the residence, and eventually located a large plastic bag containing crack cocaine on the windowsill by the side door inside of the residence. The substance was seized and subsequently tested. Laboratory tests showed that it was 48.6239 grams of crack cocaine.

On August 16, 2002, the State filed an information against Stokes charging him with Count I, conspiracy to commit dealing in cocaine, a Class A felony, I.C. § 35-48-4-1; Count II, dealing in cocaine, a Class A felony, I.C. § 35-48-4-1; and Count III, possession of cocaine, a Class C felony, I.C. § 35-48-4-6. On October 28-29, 2002, a jury trial was held. At the conclusion of trial, the jury found Stokes guilty of all Counts.

On November 26, 2002, a sentencing hearing was held. At the hearing, the trial court merged Count III, possession of cocaine, a Class C felony, into Count II, dealing in cocaine, a Class A felony. The trial court further sentenced Stokes to thirty-five years executed and five years suspended on Count I, conspiracy to commit dealing in cocaine, a Class C felony. The trial court also sentenced Stokes to thirty years executed on Count II, dealing in cocaine, a Class A felony, to run concurrently to Count I.

Stokes now appeals. Additional facts will be provided as necessary.

DISCUSSION AND DECISION

I. Jury's Review of Exhibits After Deliberation Began

First, Stokes argues that the trial court committed reversible error by allowing the jury to view the videotape surveillance of the 4340 and 4346 North Crittenden residences in the deliberation room and not in open court with the trial court's supervision.5 Stokes further argues that the trial

801 N.E.2d 1269
court erred by allowing the jury to view the videotape but not allowing the jury to view the cocaine that was recovered from the 4346 North Crittenden residence.

Conversely, the State argues that the trial court properly responded to the jury's requests during deliberations. In particular, the State contends that the videotape was material to the jury's deliberation and it was not unduly prejudicial because the jury previously viewed the videotape during trial. As a result, the State maintains that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the jury's to view the videotape after deliberations began. The State further claims that it was within the trial court's discretion to not allow the jury to view the crack cocaine that was recovered by the IPD officers.

The correct procedure for answering questions raised by the jury after deliberations have begun is set forth in Indiana Code section 34-36-1-6, which states, in pertinent part:

If, after the jury retires for deliberation:

(1) there is a disagreement among the jurors as to any part of the testimony; or
(2) the jury desires to be informed as to any point of law arising in the case;
the jury may request the officer to conduct them into court,
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 practice notes
  • Pinkston v. State, No. 49A02-0412-CR-1003.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 31 Octubre 2005
    ...reviewing sufficiency of the evidence claims, we will not reweigh the evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. Stokes v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1263, (Ind.Ct.App.2004), trans. denied. We consider only the evidence most favorable to the jury's conclusion, together with all reasonable and ......
  • Kirk v. State , No. 49A02–1110–CR–979.
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • 24 Septiembre 2012
    ...performed the overt act of convening at Barnett's home to collect the drug debt that Kirk told D.K. he was owed. See Stokes v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1263, 1273–74 (Ind.Ct.App.2004) (sufficient evidence of conspiracy to commit dealing in cocaine where, on day in question, surveillance video show......
  • Cummings v. State, No. 13A04-0501-CR-43 (IN 5/17/2006), No. 13A04-0501-CR-43
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 17 Mayo 2006
    ...her and Coy. In proving the existence of an agreement, the State is not required to show an express formal agreement. Stokes v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1263, 1273 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), trans. denied. Proof of the conspiracy may rest entirely upon circumstantial evidence. Id. However, the relation......
  • Taylor v. State, No. 79A02-1102-CR-162
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • 25 Octubre 2011
    ...conduct and the natural consequences thereof, a showing or inference of intent to commit that conduct exists." Stokes v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1263, 1272 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004)Page 5(citing Isom v. State, 589 N.E.2d 245, 247 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992)). Intent to deliver may be proved by circumsta......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
23 cases
  • Pinkston v. State, No. 49A02-0412-CR-1003.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 31 Octubre 2005
    ...reviewing sufficiency of the evidence claims, we will not reweigh the evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. Stokes v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1263, (Ind.Ct.App.2004), trans. denied. We consider only the evidence most favorable to the jury's conclusion, together with all reasonable and ......
  • Kirk v. State , No. 49A02–1110–CR–979.
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • 24 Septiembre 2012
    ...performed the overt act of convening at Barnett's home to collect the drug debt that Kirk told D.K. he was owed. See Stokes v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1263, 1273–74 (Ind.Ct.App.2004) (sufficient evidence of conspiracy to commit dealing in cocaine where, on day in question, surveillance video show......
  • Cummings v. State, No. 13A04-0501-CR-43 (IN 5/17/2006), No. 13A04-0501-CR-43
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 17 Mayo 2006
    ...her and Coy. In proving the existence of an agreement, the State is not required to show an express formal agreement. Stokes v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1263, 1273 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), trans. denied. Proof of the conspiracy may rest entirely upon circumstantial evidence. Id. However, the relation......
  • Taylor v. State, No. 79A02-1102-CR-162
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • 25 Octubre 2011
    ...conduct and the natural consequences thereof, a showing or inference of intent to commit that conduct exists." Stokes v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1263, 1272 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004)Page 5(citing Isom v. State, 589 N.E.2d 245, 247 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992)). Intent to deliver may be proved by circumsta......
  • 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