Young v. State

Decision Date22 January 1985
Docket Number1 Div. 885
Citation469 So.2d 683
PartiesInman YOUNG III v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Court of Criminal Appeals

George Huddleston III, Daphne, for appellant.

Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and James B. Prude, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

TYSON, Judge.

Inman Young, III was indicted for the possession of marijuana in violation of § 20-2-70, Code of Alabama 1975. The jury found the appellant "guilty as charged in the indictment" and after a sentencing hearing the trial court set his punishment at fifteen years in the penitentiary.

John Carlisle testified that he was under contract with the Baldwin County Sheriff's Department to investigate drug smuggling and other illegal activity in the Baldwin County area. Pursuant to his duty as an undercover investigator, he contacted the appellant and arranged a charter of appellant's airplane. Appellant was to fly Carlisle around South Baldwin County to look at some land. On January 9, 1982, Carlisle and Lance Monley--a Baldwin County Deputy Sheriff--met the appellant at Ferguson's Airport. Carlisle and Monley instructed the appellant to fly over water inlets, airports, and various other pieces of land in Baldwin County. Deputy Monley was taking pictures of abandoned airstrips, water inlets, and "part of the Gulf where boats or planes would have access to." This activity prompted the appellant to make the comment that "you guys aren't trying to buy any land, you're looking to bring in a load of drugs." (R. 20) At this point, Carlisle told the appellant that he was getting paid to fly the plane and to mind his own business.

Several times during the flight appellant mentioned "bringing loads in from Miami and the Lauderdale area and that he had just brought in a load with that same airplane." (R. 20) When the flight was over Carlisle told appellant that he would get back in touch with him. Several days later Carlisle called the appellant and set up a meeting at the Convention Center in Gulf Shores. He told appellant that he had a buyer from Montgomery that was interested in drugs and asked appellant if he had sold all of the drugs he brought back from south Florida. Carlisle had several more conversations with the appellant about the details of the drug transaction. Appellant agreed to use his airplane to transport some marijuana to Montgomery, but the weather was bad. Appellant then agreed to take the marijuana to Florida on January 14, 1982. Prior to reaching the Florida state line the appellant was arrested.

Carlisle testified that he was in a surveillance car, approximately one mile behind the appellant, and came to the scene of the arrest. He observed the officers arresting the appellant and saw "a couple of garbage bags" of marijuana in the back of the appellant's pickup truck. He further testified that he had two physical meetings with the appellant and talked with him on the telephone "three or four times" prior to the arrest. The appellant never told Carlisle he did not want to deal with Carlisle, nor did he ever appear reluctant to do so.

Lance Monley testified that he was an investigator for the Baldwin County Sheriff's Department. He corroborated Carlisle's testimony about the initial meeting with appellant and further testified that he was present when Carlisle talked to the appellant on the telephone. He and Carlisle set up a meeting with the appellant at the Convention Center. Carlisle was wearing a "body mike" and Monley and Chief Deputy Anderson worked the "mike" from outside the Convention Center. Monley was able to overhear most of the conversation between Carlisle and the appellant and stated that they agreed to buy a sample of marijuana from appellant and that the appellant was to deliver this sample to Carlisle in Florida.

On January 14, 1982, he was part of the surveillance team that followed the appellant. There were a number of other law enforcement officers also working the surveillance. When the appellant was stopped Monley observed marijuana in a dark colored trash bag, which was located in the rear of the appellant's truck. The marijuana was turned over to Norman Pearce.

Jim Anderson testified that on January 14, 1982, he was involved in the surveillance of the appellant. He was flying surveillance along with Deputy Stewart. They followed the appellant's truck to a trailer in Baldwin County. Appellant stayed at the house trailer for approximately 15 minutes. Appellant then drove to a service station in Foley, Alabama, staying approximately 10 minutes. From this point appellant proceeded to Highway 90 in Baldwin County, driving east, and he was stopped by officers.

Anderson further testified that he was the custodian of evidence and he received 10 pounds of marijuana from Deputy Pearce.

Norman Pearce testified that on January 14, 1982, he was assigned to ground surveillance of the appellant. He watched appellant's house until the appellant left, and he followed the appellant from there. Appellant left his home and got into a pickup truck and drove to a house trailer in "Bon Secour." Appellant entered the trailer and approximately 15 minutes later, exited the trailer along with another person. One of these people was carrying a brown plastic bag and placed it into the back of appellant's truck. Appellant got back into his truck and proceeded to drive to a service station. From there, he headed to Highway 90 and drove East. Pearce then stopped the appellant. The brown bag that he observed being placed in appellant's truck was there, along with other bags which looked the same. Pearce checked the plastic bag and found that it contained marijuana. The appellant was arrested at the scene.

Pearce took custody of the marijuana and placed it in the trunk of his vehicle. He transported the marijuana to the State lab in Mobile on January 15, 1982.

Deborah Sennett testified that she is employed by the State Department of Forensic Science in Mobile, Alabama. She analyzes drug samples submitted to the lab by law enforcement officers. On January 15, 1982, Deputy Pearce gave her a drug sample. Her analysis of the substance revealed that it was 10.03 pounds of marijuana. She further stated that the marijuana was packed in a brown garbage bag. After her analysis of the substance, she returned it to Deputy Pearce.

Appellant offered no testimony in his behalf and the case was submitted to the jury.

I

The appellant contends that the trial court committed reversible error by proceeding to trial without the presence of two defense witnesses. The record establishes that these witnesses, Vincent Allen Jenks and Gail Marie Jenks, were residents of the State of Florida. Prior to trial in this cause, the appellant made the following motion for a continuance:

"MR. HUDDLESTON: Leastly, on the week following the last motion docket when a continuance was denied and I first became aware that the case was to be filed, a petition for Section 12-21-283, certificate pursuant to that section of the Alabama Code requesting that the certificate issue commanding the appearance of two very important witnesses for the Defendant's case, Vincent Allen Jenks and Gail Marie Jenks.

"The certificate in respect to the attendance of foreign witnesses was executed by the Court on the 10th day of May, 1984. The certificate states as follows:

" 'This case having come to be heard on to-wit the 10th day of May, 1984, and it appearing to this Court that the State of Florida has made provisions for commanding appearance within its borders to attend and testify in criminal proceedings commenced on or about to be commenced in the State of Alabama and it further appearing that Vincent Allen Jenks and Gail Marie Jenks are material witnesses in a criminal proceeding pending before this Court and that said witnesses will be required to call and testify for four days beginning May 29th, 1984.'

"The undersigned is signed and hereby certifies, is certified in accordance with Section 12-21-283.

"Now, the certificate was forwarded together with the required fees to the State of Florida. The appropriate office of the State of Florida and the Sheriff's office attempted to serve the two witnesses. Now, I do not now know about the witness, Gail Marie Jenks, but I did receive word this morning from my secretary who received a call from the Escambia County Sheriff's Department that the Sheriff had, at least at that point in time, been unable to locate Vincent Allen Jenks at the address contained on the certificate.

"That the address was obtained from Jay Ledbetter, the State Probation Officer herein Baldwin County, which was the last known address of Vincent Allen Jenks and Gail Marie Jenks then husband and wife.

"To my knowledge, neither Gail Marie nor Vincent Allen Jenks has appeared and their testimony is pertinent, and in pertinent part would be as follows:

"Judge, do I need to make an offer of proof on this?

"THE COURT: Whatever you think you have to do, go ahead.

"MR. HUDDLESTON: That immediately prior to the arrest of the Defendant in this case, Inman Young, III, he stopped by their trailer and that was in Foley, Alabama. That inside the trailer, there was a significant amount of contraband or controlled substances and that they were subsequently charged with the same offense that Mr. Young has been charged with. They received a sentence for a year, the two, a misdemeanor possession charge and were given unsupervised probation for the entire period of that sentence.

"Consequently, it appears that their testimony would be relevant to determining how controlled substances allegedly found in the vehicle of the Defendant made their way there. I believe this Defendant would admit that the controlled substances came from them rather than on the initiation of the Defendant.

"There is also other testimony which would be solicited from these two witnesses, but it is, it would not be in my client's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Thompson v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 18 janvier 1991
    ...in a criminal trial is addressed to the sound discretion of the court and will not be disturbed unless clearly abused. Young v. State, 469 So.2d 683 (Ala.Cr.App.1985); Dawkins v. State, 455 So.2d 220 (Ala.Cr.App.1984); Sparks v. State, 450 So.2d 188 (Ala.Cr.App.1985)." Howard v. State, 506 ......
  • Anderson v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 14 avril 1987
    ...trial court's refusal to grant a continuance requires 'a positive demonstration of abuse of judicial discretion.' " Young v. State, 469 So.2d 683, 687 (Ala.Cr.App.1985). That above rule "clearly applies to cases where the continuance is sought due to an absent witness." Id., at 687, citing ......
  • Bates v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 12 mai 1989
    ...discretion of the court and [the court's ruling] will not be disturbed unless [the discretion has been] clearly abused. Young v. State, 469 So.2d 683 (Ala.Cr.App.1985); Dawkins v. State, 455 So.2d 220 (Ala.Cr.App.1984); Sparks v. State, 450 So.2d 188 (Ala.Cr.App.1984)." Howard v. State, 506......
  • Murray v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 1 mars 1991
    ...trial court's refusal to grant a continuance requires "a positive demonstration of abuse of judicial discretion." ' Young v. State, 469 So.2d 683, 687 (Ala.Cr.App.1985). That above rule 'clearly applies to cases where the continuance is sought due to an absent witness.' Id., at 687, citing ......
  • 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