Preview:

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: MATTHEW D. ANGLEMEYER Marion County Public Defender Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana GARY R. ROM Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

FILED
Dec 06 2011, 9:55 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
TORIANO MEADE, Appellant- Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee- Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CLERK

No. 49A02-1104-CR-363

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Steven Eichholtz, Judge Cause No. 49G20-1009-FD-70475

December 6, 2011

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

ROBB, Chief Judge

Case Summary and Issue Following a jury trial, Toriano Meade was convicted of possession of marijuana, a Class A misdemeanor, and possession of cocaine, a Class B felony. Meade appeals his conviction of possession of cocaine, contending the evidence was insufficient to prove he constructively possessed the cocaine in question. Concluding the evidence was sufficient to prove Meades knowledge, and therefore his constructive possession of the cocaine, we affirm. Facts and Procedural History While assisting in serving a warrant at a Knights Inn on the southside of Indianapolis, Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department officers Scott Wildauer and Michael ODay entered a room and found drug paraphernalia as well as a duffle bag containing mail addressed to Paul Horsley.1 Officer Wildauer inquired at the front desk and discovered Horsley was registered to a different room at the inn. Officers Wildauer and ODay left the premises for approximately an hour in order to allow for the police to finish processing the scene where the warrant was served, and then they returned to the inn to conduct a "knock and talk" investigation with Horsley. Horsley answered the door and invited the officers in. Meade was laying on one of the beds in the room. Officer Wildauer immediately smelled raw marijuana and saw a marijuana cigarette on the nightstand. Meade admitted the marijuana cigarette was his. Horsley and Meade were handcuffed and advised of their rights; both consented to a search of the room. Officer Wildauer found a digital scale in the nightstand with white residue on it; a crack pipe under the nightstand; a baggie of marijuana in the area above
1

Horsley was not the subject of the warrant.

2

the sink; and a plastic shopping bag next to the trash can that had several baggies in it, one of which contained a white powdery residue. The residue on the scale and in the baggie was later determined to be cocaine. After the search, Officer Wildauer spoke with Horsley and with Meade separately. Meade told Officer Wildauer that he had spent the previous night in the room. He disclaimed knowledge of the crack pipe, again admitted the marijuana cigarette was his, and claimed the marijuana found over the sink. He also admitted using the scale to weigh marijuana. When asked about the shopping bag, Meade stated, "I was partying last night with some girls in the room . . . . I smoked some marijuana, I did some cocaine, and that is what is left over." Transcript at 80. The State charged Meade with possession of cocaine, a Class D felony; possession of marijuana, a Class A misdemeanor; possession of marijuana, a Class D felony due to a prior conviction; and possession of cocaine, a Class B felony due to possession within 1,000 feet of a family housing complex. At the conclusion of a jury trial, Meade was convicted of possession of marijuana as a Class A misdemeanor and possession of cocaine as a Class B felony and sentenced to ten years at the Department of Correction, with four years suspended. Meade appeals his possession of cocaine conviction only. Discussion and Decision I. Standard of Review Our standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence claims is well-settled: we do not reweigh the evidence or judge the credibility of the witnesses, and we respect a fact-finders exclusive province to weigh conflicting evidence. We consider only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the verdict. We will affirm if the probative evidence and reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence could have allowed a
3

reasonable trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Joslyn v. State, 942 N.E.2d 809, 811 (Ind. 2011) (quotations and citations omitted). II. Possession of Cocaine To convict Meade of possession of cocaine as a Class B felony, the State was required to prove that he knowingly or intentionally possessed less than three grams of cocaine within 1,000 feet of a family housing complex. 6(b)(2)(B)(iii).2 Ind. Code

Download Toriano Meade v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law