Opinion
23A-CR-2800
06-05-2024
Justin D. Jones, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT Lisa Diane Manning Plainfield, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE Theodore E. Rokita Indiana Attorney General James Whitehead Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana Thomas Alexander Tuck Certified Legal Intern Indianapolis, Indniana
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision is not binding precedent for any court and may be cited only for persuasive value or to establish res judicata, collateral estoppel, or law of the case.
Appeal from the Hendricks Circuit Court The Honorable Daniel Zielinski, Judge Trial Court Cause No. 32C01-2301-F4-000003
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT
Lisa Diane Manning Plainfield, Indiana
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE
Theodore E. Rokita Indiana Attorney General
James Whitehead Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
Thomas Alexander Tuck Certified Legal Intern Indianapolis, Indniana
MEMORANDUM DECISION
FELIX, JUDGE
Statement of the Case
[¶1] After conducting a traffic stop, law enforcement searched Justin Jones's vehicle and found drugs, drug paraphernalia, and a firearm. Law enforcement also found marijuana on Jones's person. The State charged Jones with unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, possession of cocaine, possession of marijuana, and infractions for improper display of a license plate as well as driving left of center. A jury found Jones guilty of possession of marijuana and the traffic infractions. Jones presents one issue for our review: Whether there was sufficient evidence to support a conviction for possession of marijuana.
[¶2] We affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[¶3] On January 10, 2023, Officer Quinten Oller of the Danville Police Department noticed a 2001 Ford Ranger driving with an obscured licensed plate, so he decided to follow the vehicle. Officer Oller eventually conducted a traffic stop because he observed the Ford Ranger "weaving in his lane" and one of the vehicle's taillights was out. Tr. Vol. II at 76.
[¶4] Officer Oller identified Jones as the driver of the Ford Ranger and Raymond Rogers in the passenger seat. Officer Oller asked Jones if there were firearms or any marijuana in the vehicle. Jones looked to the back of the vehicle then told Officer Oller that he did not have marijuana or firearms. Officer Oller conducted a K-9 sniff of the Ford Ranger. The K-9 made an indication that there were drugs in the vehicle, so Officer Oller began to search the interior of the vehicle.
[¶5] In conducting the search, Officer Oller discovered a cannabis cigarette, a rocklike substance in a gum wrapper, a Glock 43 firearm, and drug paraphernalia. Officer Oller then conducted a search of Jones and found a package of cannabis labeled as "Cherry Chucks." Tr. Vol. II at 65. On January 11, 2023, the State charged Jones with unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon as a Level 4 felony, possession of cocaine as a Level 6 felony, possession of marijuana as a Class B misdemeanor, improper display of a license plate as a Class C infraction, and driving left of center as a Class C infraction.
[¶6] Jones's jury trial was held on August 15, 2023. Officer Oller testified that he sent the cannabis and the rock-like substance to the Indiana State Drug Laboratory for testing. Gozel Berkeliyeva, a forensic scientist at the Indiana State Drug Laboratory, also testified. Berkeliyeva had tested the cannabis and the rock-like substance, and the results revealed that the cannabis was marijuana and the rock-like substance was heroin. The jury found Jones guilty of possession of marijuana, improper display of a license plate, and driving left of center. Jones now appeals. Discussion and Decision
[¶7] Jones argues that the State failed to present sufficient evidence at trial to support his conviction for possession of marijuana. "Sufficiency-of-the-evidence arguments trigger a deferential standard of appellate review, in which we 'neither reweigh the evidence nor judge witness credibility, instead reserving those matters to the province of the jury.'" Owen v. State, 210 N.E.3d 256, 264 (Ind. 2023) (quoting Brantley v. State, 91 N.E.3d 566, 570 (Ind. 2018)), reh'g denied (Aug. 17, 2023). In our review, "we consider only 'the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the verdict.'" Id. (quoting Matheney v. State, 583 N.E.2d 1202, 1208 (Ind. 1992)). We will reverse a guilty verdict only when no reasonable trier of fact "could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt." Lock v. State, 971 N.E.2d 71, 74 (Ind. 2012) (quoting Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144, 146 (Ind. 2007)).
[¶8] In order to convict Jones of possession of marijuana as a Class B Misdemeanor, the State had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jones knowingly or intentionally possessed marijuana. See Ind. Code § 35-48-4-11(a)(1). Jones argues only that the State failed to demonstrate that the cannabis tested by the lab was the same cannabis taken from Jones. At trial, Officer Oller testified that he collected the cannabis at the traffic stop and sent it to the laboratory. Berkeliyeva testified that she received the cannabis and tested the cannabis, and the results revealed the cannabis to be marijuana. Jones claims that there was insufficient evidence to show the cannabis tested was the "Cherry Chucks" taken from Jones. Rather, Jones contends that the positive test for marijuana could have been the result of only testing the cannabis cigarette and the jury could have believed that Jones did not possess this cigarette. This argument is merely a request for us to reweigh the evidence, which we will not do. See Owen, 210 N.E.3d at 264. To the extent that Jones's argument amounts to a claim for lack of foundation for the drug tests, Jones waived this argument because he failed to object to the admission of the test results at trial. See Means v. State, 201 N.E.3d 1158, 1166 (Ind. 2023) (quoting Raess v. Doescher, 883 N.E.2d 790, 796-97 (Ind. 2008)). Thus, we conclude that there was sufficient evidence to convict Jones of possession of marijuana.
[¶9] Affirmed.
Altice, C.J., and Bradford, J., concur.