Jean Kenneth Toney v. State

Citation: Not availableDocket: 05-13-00729-CR

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; February 4, 2014; Texas; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Jean Kenneth Toney was convicted of possessing between one and four grams of methamphetamine, with the offense occurring in a drug-free zone, resulting in a sentence of twenty years’ imprisonment and a $20,000 fine. Toney appealed, claiming insufficient evidence for both his intentional possession of the drug and the drug-free zone designation. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, stating that the legal principles applicable to the case were well established.

The case background revealed that on January 19, 2012, Deputy Adam Bradshaw observed Rosabella Byrd leaving a known drug house. Noticing Byrd's suspicious behavior and her narcotics history, Bradshaw followed her to where Toney was getting into his truck. After observing Toney's actions and prior narcotics history, Bradshaw stopped Toney for a traffic violation at an intersection near a park, which was within 1,000 feet of a drug-free zone. During the stop, Bradshaw noted Toney's unusual movements, suspecting he might be hiding evidence. 

Upon requesting identification, Bradshaw spotted drug scales in the truck, which heightened his suspicions. Byrd, appearing very nervous, eventually produced two baggies containing a crystal-like substance, which Bradshaw believed to be methamphetamine. Both Toney and Byrd were subsequently arrested for possession of the drug.

Bradshaw conducted a search of Toney’s truck, discovering a cellphone and a "dope note" containing drug-related information. In Byrd's purse, Bradshaw found two cellphones, a pair of scales disguised as a cellphone, and drug paraphernalia, including baggies and glass pipes associated with methamphetamine. Although Bradshaw acknowledged that the scales and baggies could have non-drug-related uses, no latent fingerprints were obtained from these items. Byrd had previously pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine and had a criminal history involving theft and drug offenses.

Byrd detailed her relationship with Toney, describing him as her dealer since November 2011. She frequently obtained methamphetamine for him, commonly an "eight ball," weighing 3.7 to 3.8 grams, costing around $230-$240. On January 19, 2012, after receiving a message from Toney, Byrd purchased methamphetamine and was subsequently pulled over by police while in Toney's truck. During the stop, Toney discarded scales and instructed Byrd to hide the drugs he threw at her. Initially unresponsive to police inquiries about drugs, Byrd eventually admitted to possessing methamphetamine, claiming ownership of one baggie while asserting the other belonged to Toney.

After their arrest, Toney allegedly urged Byrd to take responsibility for the drugs, promising support and legal assistance, though Byrd was skeptical of his promises. Forensic analysis confirmed the contents of Byrd's baggies to be 3.26 grams and 0.20 grams of methamphetamine. Byrd also mentioned having two cellphones in her purse, one belonging to her and the other stolen from Toney, which included Toney's number saved under the contact name "Boss Man" due to their drug transactions.

Javier Soto, a deputy with the Grayson County Sheriff's Department, testified about securing a search warrant for cellphones found in Byrd’s purse and Toney’s truck. He successfully powered on two phones, capturing text messages between “Boss Man” and “Rosa” that indicated Byrd was purchasing narcotics for Toney, with specific references to methamphetamine. Soto also linked Toney to the phone number of “Boss Man” from a previous investigation. William Heath, a sergeant with the Denison Police Department, confirmed communication with Toney during a follow-up investigation. Dennis Michael, an investigator, verified Toney's identity through fingerprint comparison with federal records, which indicated Toney was on supervised release on January 19, 2012. A recorded jail call from Toney expressed concern about contacting his probation officer and recovering property from his impounded truck.

During the trial, evidence included a drug-free zone map filed with the Grayson County clerk, which established the offense’s occurrence within a drug-free zone, confirmed by witness Bradshaw using Google Earth to measure the distance from the traffic stop to Forest Park at approximately 964 feet. During the punishment phase, additional drug-free zone maps were admitted. Toney's private investigator, Jeffery Jones, measured the distance from the traffic stop to a playground slide at Forest Park as 1,362 feet, although he acknowledged uncertainty regarding the legal measurement requirements.

The standard for reviewing the sufficiency of evidence is established under Jackson v. Virginia, requiring examination of all evidence in favor of the verdict to determine if a rational jury could find the essential elements of the offense proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This standard affirms the trier of fact's role in resolving testimonial conflicts and drawing reasonable inferences from the evidence presented.

The jury serves as the fact finder, responsible for assessing the credibility of witnesses and determining which testimony to believe. Courts defer to the jury's credibility assessments and do not re-evaluate evidence. In a case concerning possession of methamphetamine, the appellant, Toney, argues that the evidence is insufficient to demonstrate his intentional or knowing possession of the drug found with another individual, Byrd. The legal definition of possession includes actual care, custody, control, or management of a controlled substance, which requires the State to prove that the accused had control over the substance and knew it was contraband. Mere presence at a location where drugs are found is not enough to establish possession, especially if the accused does not have exclusive control of the area. Additional independent facts must link the accused to the contraband. A nonexclusive list of circumstantial factors that could indicate possession includes presence during a search, proximity to the contraband, being under the influence, possession of other drugs, incriminating statements, attempts to flee, and other suspicious behaviors. No definitive formula exists for establishing possession; rather, the logical strength of the circumstantial evidence is crucial in determining whether the accused knowingly possessed the contraband.

Byrd testified that she saved Toney’s phone number as “Boss Man” due to his role in supplying her with drugs, including an instance on January 19, 2012, when she purchased methamphetamine for him. Soto confirmed that text messages from Byrd's phone indicated drug transactions with Toney. During a traffic stop, Toney exhibited suspicious behavior, attempting to hide evidence by throwing digital scales and a baggie of methamphetamine at Byrd. Byrd claimed Toney wanted her to take the blame for the drugs in exchange for his support. The evidence presented was deemed sufficient for a jury to rationally conclude Toney knowingly possessed methamphetamine.

Regarding the drug-free zone issue, Toney argued that the evidence did not prove the offense occurred within such a zone, claiming the measurement should be taken from the playground equipment, which was allegedly 1,362 feet away. However, the law defines a “playground” broadly, and maps indicating the drug-free zone boundaries were submitted as evidence. Testimony confirmed that the incident occurred within a designated drug-free zone, leading to the conclusion that the evidence supported Toney's enhancement for possession of a controlled substance in this area.

The distance from the intersection of Mirick and Main to Forest Park was calculated to be approximately 964 feet using Google Earth. Testimony indicated that Toney, while being followed, was at times closer to Forest Park than during the stop. The jury was tasked with resolving conflicting evidence, and it was found that a rational juror could conclude the offense occurred in a drug-free zone. Toney's objections to the maps used in the trial were noted, but he did not raise an issue on appeal regarding the trial court’s evidentiary rulings, effectively waiving any complaint about the maps' admission. Additionally, Toney failed to adequately brief his arguments by not providing supporting authority or applying the law to the facts, nor did he present evidence disputing the accuracy of the maps' representations of drug-free zone boundaries. Consequently, the trial court’s judgment was affirmed.