State v. Spencer

Citations: 533 So. 2d 396; 1988 La. App. LEXIS 2053; 1988 WL 105504Docket: No. KA 9030

Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal; October 11, 1988; Louisiana; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Defendants Clarence Griffin and Dorothy Spencer were charged with possession with intent to distribute pentazocine under La.R.S. 40:967 A. Following a jury trial, both were convicted and sentenced to seven years of hard labor without the possibility of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. Griffin appealed the conviction, raising one assignment of error. 

On March 17, 1987, Officers Robert Baudy and Eddie Selby conducted surveillance at 2680 Forstall Street in New Orleans after receiving a tip about drug sales from a confidential informant. They observed a male approach the residence, interact with Spencer, and exchange currency for an item. Later, they saw Eugene Wallace park his vehicle, approach Spencer, hand over cash, and receive a small object in return. Upon stopping Wallace, officers found an aluminum foil packet containing one tablet of pentazocine and one non-controlled substance.

Following this, officers secured a search warrant and executed it after observing a male being admitted to the residence. Upon entry, Spencer threw eight foil packets containing 'T's and Blues' on the floor, while Griffin pointed a loaded revolver at the officers before complying with their orders. Spencer indicated there were more drugs, leading to the recovery of two bags with twenty foil packets each, four handguns from Griffin's room, and additional drug paraphernalia from the residence.

A woman, shocked upon seeing uniformed officers at a residence, claimed she came to retrieve jewelry from Spencer. Officers observed needle marks on her arms. Griffin testified he lived with Spencer for three years, asserting that all illegal drugs found belonged to him for personal use. He stated he used 'T's and Blues' for 8–10 years, consuming twenty 'sets' daily, and denied selling drugs on March 17th. He claimed Spencer did not use or sell drugs and was asleep when the officers arrived. Spencer corroborated Griffin’s testimony regarding their cohabitation and denied any drug dealings. A police criminalist testified that heavy use could involve 30–40 'sets' daily, which would leave a user in a stupor, yet officers noted Griffin appeared sober during the search. The criminalist indicated that the quantity and packaging of the drugs suggested distribution rather than mere possession. The jury convicted both defendants of possession with intent to distribute pentazocine. On appeal, Griffin contested the sufficiency of evidence for intent to distribute, admitting possession but claiming it only amounted to simple possession. The state needed to prove he possessed pentazocine with intent to distribute. Griffin's admissions, combined with circumstantial evidence, established constructive possession and supported an inference of intent to distribute.

Circumstantial evidence can serve as a basis for proof, provided the inferred facts exclude all reasonable hypotheses of guilt, as established by La.R.S. 15:438. This principle does not create a separate standard for appellate review. An appellate court must assess whether a rational trier of fact could conclude, viewing the evidence favorably to the prosecution, that each essential element of the crime was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, following the precedent set in Jackson v. Virginia and State v. Edwards.

Testimony from Officers Baudy and Selby indicates a strong inference that Ms. Spencer sold 'T's and Blues' on the night in question. The seized 'set' from Wallace matched the packaging of eight 'sets' discarded by Spencer when the police arrived, while forty additional 'sets' were also packaged for distribution. Griffin claimed ownership of all forty-eight 'sets,' which could be interpreted as consistent with heavy personal use but also suggests intent to distribute.

The court previously affirmed a conviction for possession with intent to distribute when a defendant was found with a significant quantity of similar drugs. Despite Griffin's claim that Spencer only approached the door upon the police's arrival, the jury could reasonably infer he was untruthful and that the drugs were not solely for personal use. Given their three-year cohabitation, it was plausible for the jury to conclude that both were involved in distributing 'T's and Blues.'

The circumstantial evidence supports the conclusion that Griffin possessed pentazocine with intent to distribute, excluding the hypothesis of innocent possession. Overall, the evidence, viewed in favor of the prosecution, allows for a rational conclusion of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. As a result, Griffin's conviction and sentence are upheld. The unidentified male present at the scene was not arrested.