Opinion
No. 53706-7-I
Filed: April 18, 2005 UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appeal from Superior Court of King County. Docket No: 02-1-06468-6. Judgment or order under review. Date filed: 01/09/2004. Judge signing: Hon. Ronald Kessler.
Counsel for Appellant(s), Nielsen Broman Koch Pllc, Attorney at Law, 1908 E Madison St, Seattle, WA 98122.
Eric J. Nielsen, Attorney at Law, 1908 E Madison St, Seattle, WA 98122.
Counsel for Respondent(s), Davisson Doane Culbertson, King County Prosecuting Attorney, 516 3rd Ave Ste W554, Seattle, WA 98104-2390.
Prosecuting Atty King County, King Co Pros/App Unit Supervisor, W554 King County Courthouse, 516 Third Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104.
Carlos Garcia-Palomares appeals his conviction of possession of cocaine, arguing that the trial court should not have admitted rocks of cocaine into evidence because there was a gap in the chain of custody. We conclude that there was an adequate chain of custody and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the rocks of cocaine
Officers Hebrank and Olson transported Garcia-Palomares to the Regional Justice Center where Corrections Officer Lund searched Garcia-Palomares and found a wadded paper towel pressed up inside the toe of one of his boots. The paper towel contained little yellowish rocks. Officer Olson saw Officer Lund discover the rocks in the boot. He does not recall if he or Officer Lund put the rocks into the evidence bag, but he "took custody of them right away," conducted a field test, weighed the rocks, returned the rocks to the evidence bag, sealed the bag, initialed the outside of the bag and put the sealed, initialed bag into a locked evidence locker. Officer Olson identified exhibit 3 as the same bag he initialed that contained the rocks taken from the boot. The contents of the bag were in the same condition as when he put them into the evidence locker.
Officer Lund testified that he put the rocks into an evidence bag, set the bag on a counter and then handed the bag to Officer Hebrank. Officer Hebrank recalls that Officer Lund put the evidence bag on a counter where Officer Olson collected the bag and conducted the field test. Officer Hebrank does not recall if he ever handled the evidence bag.
Over objection to a lack of chain of custody, the trial court admitted the rocks of cocaine into evidence concluding that "[w]hile imperfect, I am satisfied that this chain has been established with sufficient completeness. Its not reasonable to believe that it has been exchanged with another item or been contaminated or tampered with." The jury found Garcia-Palomares guilty of possession of cocaine.
The sole issue raised on appeal is whether there is an adequate chain of custody in light of the testimony that Officer Lund handed the evidence bag to Officer Hebrank rather than to Officer Olson. A physical object connected to a crime may be admitted into evidence only when it has been satisfactorily identified and shown to be in substantially the same condition as when the crime was committed. Factors to be considered include "the nature of the article, the circumstances surrounding the preservation and custody of it, and the likelihood of intermeddlers tampering with it." The proponent of the evidence need not identify it with absolute certainty; minor discrepancies or uncertainty on the part of witnesses affect the weight to be accorded the evidence, not its admissibility. The trial court's broad discretion in determining admissibility will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.
State v. Campbell, 103 Wn.2d 1, 21, 691 P.2d 929 (1984).
Campbell, 103 Wn.2d at 21 (quoting Gallego v. United States, 276 F.2d 914, 917 (9th Cir. 1960)).
Campbell, 103 Wn.2d at 21.
Campbell, 103 Wn.2d at 21.
The testimony of Officer Olson provides an adequate chain of custody. He saw Officer Lund discover the rocks of cocaine in the boot, he "took custody of the rocks right away," tested and weighed the rocks, returned the rocks to the evidence bag that he sealed, initialed and then placed in the evidence locker. The inconsistency arising from whether Officer Lund handed the evidence bag to Officer Hebrank or whether Officer Olson collected the rocks right away, is a minor uncertainty that goes solely to the weight to be given the evidence and did not preclude the admission of the rocks of cocaine. The trial court did not abuse its discretion.
We affirm.
KENNEDY, COLEMAN and COX, JJ.