Wright v. State

• Decision Date: 23 November 1982
• Docket Number: 6 Div. 654
• Citation: Wright v. State, 423 So.2d 345 (Ala. Crim. App. 1982)
• Parties: Henry James WRIGHT v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals

Page 345

423 So.2d 345

Henry James WRIGHT v. STATE.

6 Div. 654.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

Nov. 23, 1982.

Charles E. Caldwell, Birmingham, for appellant.

Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Billington M. Garrett, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

HARRIS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was indicted by the Jefferson County Grand Jury on January 9, 1981, for the offense of robbery in the first degree in violation of § 13A-8-41, Code of Alabama 1975. Appellant was arraigned in open court on January 16, 1981, where he entered a plea of not guilty to the indictment. He was tried before a jury on May 20, 1981, and found guilty. The court sentenced appellant to a term of twenty years' imprisonment in the Alabama State Prison System. This appeal followed.

Henry Barrett, the robbery victim, testified that, on July 30, 1980, at approximately 1:40 p.m., he was making his deliveries as a Pepsi Cola route deliveryman in the Jefferson West End area in Birmingham, Alabama. He stated that, as he finished a delivery, he got into his truck when a person whom he identified as the appellant pulled a revolver and demanded the money. Mr. Barrett testified that the appellant took the money and proceeded down an alley and got into a two-tone car and fled the scene.

Mr. Barrett went inside a business and called the police. A few minutes later the police arrived at the scene and a description of the person and car was given to them by Mr. Barrett.

Officer Douglas Foster of the Birmingham Police Department testified that he and Officer K.W. Patterson responded to the robbery call at 1537 Jefferson Avenue at approximately 12:30 p.m. When the officers arrived, they had a conversation with Mr. Barrett in reference to the robbery that occurred. While on the scene, the officers received another call about a hit and run accident that happened approximately one block away.

The officers responded to the hit and run call and upon arriving received a description of the automobile and the tag number of the car that had fled the hit and run accident. Officer Foster testified that the information about the robbery and the hit and run accident was turned over to the Robbery Division of the City of Birmingham.

Sergeant John Barefield testified that he was assigned to investigate the report from the Patrol Division regarding the robbery. Sergeant Barefield traced the automobile registration to a K.B. Cash. After a conversation at the Cash residence, Sergeant Barefield was informed that the automobile belonged to Theauthur Cash. After Sergeant Barefield talked with Theauthur Cash, he conducted a photographic lineup with Mr. Barrett where five photographs were shown to him. Sergeant Barefield testified that Mr. Barrett identified Henry James Wright, the appellant, as the person who robbed him.

Theauthur Cash testified that, in the latter part of July, 1980, he and Henry James Wright were at Barbara's (last name unknown) house and Henry James Wright borrowed his car. Cash described the car as a 1978 Ford LTD, four-door, green top and white body. He stated that Henry Wright and a person named Tyrone Watts left in the car at about 10:30 a.m., and later that day when the car was parked in Barbara's driveway, he noticed the car had been damaged. Mr. Cash testified that Henry Wright gave him a telephone number of the person who hit the car, but when he dialed the number no one answered. Mr. Cash also testified that he received a call from Sergeant Barefield in reference to his car and he explained about the car.

Joseph Wright, the brother of appellant, testified that on July 30, 1980, he was with the appellant from 11:30 a.m. until 1:30 p.m. at their mother's house. Joseph Wright also stated that, when he left about 1:00 p.m., Henry Wright was still there with his mother.

Henry James Wright, the appellant, testified that on July 30, 1980, he was at home with his mother because she was old and sick. Henry Wright's testimony was that he did not borrow Theauthur Cash's automobile; furthermore, he testified that he did not know a person named Tyrone Watts, and he had never been anywhere with him. Wright testified that he had not owned a gun and that he had never seen Mr. Barrett before except at the preliminary hearing.

Appellant bases his appeal on two arguments. His first contention is that the court erred in allowing the introduction of "mugshot" photographs of the appellant into evidence for the jury to view; and, second, that the court abused its discretion in the sentencing of the appellant.

Appellant contends the admission of the five photographs used in the extrajudicial photographic identification procedure amounts to reversible error. He contends that the photographs were admitted into evidence before the appellant's identity had been placed in issue, and, as a result, appellant's right to a fair trial was prejudiced.

When the photographs were first introduced at trial, defense counsel objected on the ground that they had not been properly authenticated. Mr. Barrett testified that all five photographs introduced at trial...