Wright v. State, 59513
| Decision Date | 25 June 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 59513,59513 |
| Citation | 154 Ga.App. 400,268 S.E.2d 378 |
| Parties | WRIGHT et al. v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Paul W. Calhoun, Jr., Vidalia, for appellants.
H. Reginald Thompson, Dist. Atty., Richard A. Malone, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Robert and Cynthia Wright were convicted by a jury of two counts of violating the Georgia Controlled Substances Act. (Possession of marijuana with intent to distribute and possession of cocaine.) Cynthia was sentenced to seven years on each count to be served concurrently with the last four years on probation and a $500 fine to be paid six months after release from prison. Robert was sentenced to nine years on each count to be served concurrently with the last four years on probation and a $500 fine to be paid six months after release from prison. They bring this appeal following the denial of their motion for a new trial.
1. They first assert the general grounds. The evidence showed that a police officer had probable cause to obtain a search warrant for a house rented by Robert Wright. When the warrant was executed, the Wrights and Robert Wright's brother were sitting in the living room and the men were smoking marijuana. During the ensuing search, two plastic bags containing approximately two pounds of marijuana were found beneath some clothing on a chair in a child's bedroom, a small quantity of marijuana was discovered in plain view on top of a dresser in the master bedroom along with a metric scale, some ziplock plastic bags, several small brown "coin" envelopes, a tin can containing $1,399 and a cigar box containing $199. A box containing $1,688 was found in a drawer containing women's underclothes and a small silver colored spoon bearing 1.5 grams of cocaine residue was found in the master bedroom closet. Appellants testified that Robert Wright's brother had resided with them for one and one-half months, that he had full access to the house including keys to the house, their car and their barbecue business, and that he slept in the child's bedroom.
It is well established that "(a)s between husband and wife, there is a presumption of law that (contraband) found in the home belongs to the husband . . . But such a presumption cannot be broadened to include all relatives who may be living in the same house with the defendant" and have equal access to it. Harper v. State, 85 Ga.App. 252, 254, 69 S.E.2d 102, 104 (1952). The equal access rule applies to contraband that is for the most part in "open, notorious and easily accessible areas." Kenerleber v. State, 137 Ga.App. 618, 224 S.E.2d 476, 477 (1976). In the present case, appellants have affirmatively shown that Robert's brother had an equal opportunity to possess the marijuana found in the child's room. Brown v. State, 130 Ga.App. 11, 202 S.E.2d 268 (1973). However, as to the marijuana found in plain view on top of the dresser in the master bedroom, Robert Wright's admission that he occupied the room and that he was smoking marijuana when the police arrived would authorize a jury to find that he possessed the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thomas v. US, 91-CF-113
...the UNA where it was in force. 30 See, e.g., Hare v. State, 53 Ala.App. 596, 302 So.2d 569, 571 (Crim.App.1974); Wright v. State, 154 Ga.App. 400, 268 S.E.2d 378, 380 (1980) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 900, 101 S.Ct. 270, 66 L.Ed.2d 130 (1980); State v. Vance, 61 Haw. 291, 60......
-
Xiong v. State
...Xiong's cousin had the same access to the contraband, the baggies, scales, and the notebook as Xiong. See, e.g., Wright v. State, 154 Ga.App. 400, 401(1), 268 S.E.2d 378 (1980) (defendants affirmatively showed that adult brother had equal access to drugs found on chair in bedroom in which h......
-
Smith v. State, 60463
...445, 224 S.E.2d 99 (1976); Braden v. State, 135 Ga.App. 827(1), 219 S.E.2d 479 (1975). The distinction is drawn in Wright v. State, 154 Ga.App. 400, 268 S.E.2d 378 (1980), where drugs found in a child's room were equally available to those living in the home, while those in Robert Wright's ......
-
Parrish v. State
...denial of the directed verdict was not error. Prescott v. State, 164 Ga.App. 671, 672(1), 297 S.E.2d 362 (1982); Wright v. State, 154 Ga.App. 400(1), 268 S.E.2d 378 cert. den. 449 U.S. 900, 101 S.Ct. 270, 66 L.Ed.2d The defense to the tampering charge was that no one saw the defendant pull ......