No. 10-03-00190-CR
Opinion delivered and filed November 10, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 87th District Court, Freestone County, Texas, Trial Court # 03-023-CR. Affirmed.
Before Chief Justice GRAY, Justice VANCE, and Justice REYNA.
BILL VANCE, Justice.
Appellant, Mark Norris, was tried before a jury and convicted of possession of more than one gram but less than four grams of methamphetamine. TEX. HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.115(c) (Vernon 2003). After a punishment hearing, the trial court found seven prior felony convictions to be true, thus enhancing the punishment to a range of 25 years to 99 years to life. The court sentenced Norris to sixty years' confinement. Norris appeals on four issues: (1) the evidence is legally insufficient to show that Norris possessed the controlled substance; (2) the evidence is legally insufficient under the Jackson standard because of the failure to charge the jury on the law of parties; (3) the evidence is legally insufficient under the state standard because of the failure to charge the law of parties; and (4) the failure to charge the jury on the law of parties resulted in egregious error. We will overrule the issues and affirm the judgment.
BACKGROUND
Freestone County Sheriff's Deputy Robert Willis testified that he was en route to a residence in response to a disturbance call and also in an attempt to serve a felony arrest warrant on Norris when he saw Norris in a pickup truck. There were four occupants in the cab: Taylor Manville was the driver; Melinda Prater sat in the middle; Norris sat near the passenger door; Jodie Tidrow sat in Norris's lap. Deputy Willis ordered the occupants out of the vehicle. When Norris exited the passenger side, a black bag came out of the truck at his feet and landed on the ground. Willis opened the black bag and found a screwdriver kit with the name "Mark" written on it. Inside the kit were four small bags of methamphetamine. The bags were tested by a DPS chemist who testified they contained 2.89 grams of methamphetamine. Affirmative Links
Norris's first issue argues that the evidence is legally insufficient because the State failed to affirmatively link Norris to the drugs found at the scene. "Affirmative links" is a shorthand expression to identify what must be proven in a prosecution for the possession of illegal drugs. Brown v. State, 911 S.W.2d 744, 747 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995). An accused must not only have exercised actual care, control, or custody of the substance, but must also have been conscious of his connection with it and have known what it was. Id. Evidence which affirmatively links him to it suffices for proof that he possessed it knowingly. Id. When reviewing the legal sufficiency of the evidence, we view all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19, 199 S.Ct. 2781, 2788-89, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). Deputy Willis testified that the odor of anhydrous ammonia — a farm fertilizer that is used in the manufacture of methamphetamine — was coming from a leaking camouflaged five gallon propane bottle in the bed of the truck. Norris was in an enclosed single cab pickup with the bag containing the methamphetamine. Because the bag fell out of the truck by Norris's feet when he exited the vehicle, the jury could rationally have concluded that the bag had been in Norris's lap or at his feet while he was in the truck. Norris also had drug paraphernalia (a syringe and needle with orange cap) in his left shirt pocket. Norris's first name — "Mark" — was written on the screwdriver kit in the bag containing the methamphetamine, numerous empty small bags, a band to wrap around one's arm prior to putting a needle in one's vein, a spoon, and a cotton ball. A Freestone County inmate testified that Manville — the driver of the truck — told him that Norris "didn't have no dope on him, that it was his dope." Considering all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, the jury could rationally have found that Norris knowingly or intentionally possessed the 2.89 grams of methamphetamine. Jackson, 443 U.S. at 318-19, 99 S.Ct. at 2788-89. Finding the evidence legally sufficient, we overrule this issue. Law of Parties
Norris's remaining issues contend that the court should have instructed the jury on the law of parties, and that its failure to do so renders the evidence legally insufficient and was egregious error. Norris argues that even if he can be linked to the methamphetamine in the black bag, the evidence is insufficient to convict him as a party to the possession of methamphetamine found on the others in the truck. However, the amended indictment charged Norris only with possession of more than one gram, but less than four grams, of methamphetamine. The jury was so charged and a verdict was rendered finding him guilty of that offense. The black bag contained 2.89 grams of methamphetamine. As discussed above, there was legally sufficient evidence for the jury to find that Norris knowingly or intentionally possessed that methamphetamine. Therefore it was not necessary for the State to rely on the law of parties to convict him for possession of any additional methamphetamine. We overrule these issues. CONCLUSION
Having overruled Norris's issues, we affirm the judgment.