Opinion
No. 38153-2-II.
Filed: September 9, 2009.
Appeal from the Superior Court, Mason County, No. 08-1-00179-2, Toni A. Sheldon, J., entered August 4, 2008.
Affirmed by unpublished opinion per Bridgewater, J., concurred in by Van Deren, C.J., and Hunt, J.
Unpublished Opinion
Richard J. Hudson appeals his conviction for unlawful possession of methamphetamine, arguing that the State failed to present sufficient evidence. Concluding that the State presented sufficient evidence, we affirm.
A commissioner of this court initially considered Hudson's appeal as a motion on the merits under RAP 18.14 and then transferred it to a panel of judges.
On April 3, 2008, Deputy Jeffrey Rhoades saw Hudson, whom he knew, riding in a car travelling on State Route 3. He confirmed that a warrant was outstanding for Hudson. He noticed that the vehicle's windshield was cracked in a way that obstructed the driver's vision. He stopped the vehicle, which was owned and being driven by James Haggin. He ascertained that a warrant was outstanding for Haggin as well. After a backup officer arrived, Deputy Rhoades arrested both Haggin and Hudson on their outstanding warrants. He searched Hudson incident to arrest and testified that he found a small cut plastic straw, with a white residue on the inside, in the interior breast pocket of Hudson's coat. A search of the vehicle located a glass pipe, containing residue, several boxes of Sudafed, receipts for the purchase of the Sudafed on April 3, 2008, plastic tubing, drain cleaner, a propane tank, lithium batteries and a bag of ammonium sulfate.
The State charged Hudson with unlawful possession of methamphetamine and with possession of pseudoephedrine with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. Deputy Rhoades testified as described above. A forensic scientist testified that the residue in the straw and the glass pipe contained methamphetamine. Hudson denied ever possessing the straw that Deputy Rhoades testified he found in the interior pocket of Hudson's coat. Hudson's coat, which has no inside pockets, was admitted into evidence. Deputy Rhoades testified on rebuttal that he was mistaken, in both his original testimony and in his police report, that he found the straw in an interior pocket of Hudson's jacket. He testified that he found the straw in an exterior pocket of Hudson's jacket.
The jury found Hudson guilty as charged. He appeals only from the conviction for unlawful possession of the methamphetamine found in the straw.
Hudson argues that the State failed to present sufficient evidence that he possessed methamphetamine. He contends that because Deputy Rhoades adamantly testified that he found the straw containing the methamphetamine in an interior pocket of Hudson's jacket, even though that jacket has no interior pockets, the State failed to present sufficient evidence that he had actual possession of methamphetamine. And he contends that the State did not present sufficient evidence that he had constructive possession of the glass pipe containing methamphetamine found in Haggin's vehicle.
Evidence is sufficient to support a conviction if any rational trier of fact could find the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State. State v. Thomas, 150 Wn.2d 821, 874, 83 P.3d 970 (2004). An appellant claiming insufficiency of the evidence "admits the truth of the State's evidence and all inferences that reasonably can be drawn therefrom." Thomas, 150 Wn.2d at 874 (quoting State v. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d 192, 201, 829 P.2d 1068 (1992)).
Taken in the light most favorable to the State, Deputy Rhoades testified that during a lawful search incident to arrest, he found a straw containing methamphetamine on Hudson's person. The fact that Deputy Rhoades initially testified that he found the straw in an interior pocket of Hudson's jacket, and after being shown that Hudson's jacket had no interior pockets, changed his testimony to reflect that he found the straw in an exterior pocket of Hudson's jacket, goes to Deputy Rhoades' credibility, not to the sufficiency of the evidence. State v. Walton, 64 Wn. App. 410, 415-16, 824 P.2d 533, review denied, 119 Wn.2d 1011 (1992). A rational jury could find that Hudson unlawfully possessed methamphetamine in the straw found on his person. Sufficient evidence supports the jury's verdict.
Affirmed.
A majority of the panel has determined this opinion will not be printed in the Washington Appellate Reports but it will be filed for public record pursuant to RCW 2.06.040.
HUNT, J. and VAN DEREN, C.J., concur.