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.

FILED
Apr 25 2008, 8:51 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ZACHARY A. WITTE Fort Wayne, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana NICOLE M. SCHUSTER Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
TRENELL C. BRIGHT, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 02A03-0802-CR-55

APPEAL FROM THE ALLEN SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Kenneth R. Scheibenberger, Judge Cause No. 02D04-0612-FC-254

April 25, 2008

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

CRONE, Judge

Trenell C. Bright challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for class C felony cocaine possession. We affirm. The facts most favorable to the trial court's judgment indicate that Bright was on home detention on November 8, 2006, when Allen County Community Corrections requested that a home detention officer visit Bright's home to conduct an investigation regarding a urine screen that tested positive for marijuana. On November 22, 2006, Bright moved into a Fort Wayne apartment that Katie Lopez shared with her three children, ages six, seven, and nine. Bright had asked to reside with Lopez temporarily while his phone was being repaired because a working phone was required for electronic monitoring purposes. Bright notified community corrections officials of his change of residence. On the afternoon of November 27, 2006, Andrew Irick--a Fort Wayne Police Department detective who worked part time as a home detention officer--visited Lopez's apartment with Randy Miller, a community corrections special deputy, to conduct the home visit requested by community corrections. Officer Miller knocked on the partially open door, and Lopez answered. The officers asked if Bright was at home, and they saw him exit a bedroom to the right of the front door and enter the living room. Lopez told Bright that the officers wanted to see him. The officers entered the apartment and announced the purpose of their visit. Bright said, "Okay," and sat on the living room sofa. Tr. at 13. Lopez went into her bedroom. On the table in front of the sofa, the officers saw a wooden "dugout" commonly used for smoking marijuana. The dugout contained a green, leafy material that smelled like marijuana. The officers arrested and Mirandized Bright, Lopez, and a third person who had
2

entered the apartment during the officers' visit. The two officers requested backup. The backup officers arrived and searched the premises. Within three to five minutes, Officer Stephen Snyder found a baggie containing approximately twelve grams of cocaine in the hearth of a fireplace-shaped Christmas decoration located next to a television and within six feet of the sofa. Officers found a crack pipe in Lopez's bookbag and another crack pipe in her bedroom. The officers found over $1100 in cash on Bright's person. The State charged Bright with class C felony cocaine possession, class D felony marijuana possession, and class A misdemeanor paraphernalia possession. At the bench trial on September 12, 2007, Lopez admitted owning the wooden dugout and the Christmas decoration but denied having any knowledge of the cocaine. Bright did not testify. The trial court found Bright guilty of cocaine possession and not guilty of the remaining charges. On appeal, Bright contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence that he possessed the cocaine. Our standard of review in such cases is well settled: [W]e neither reweigh evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses. We consider only the evidence which is favorable to the judgment along with the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom to determine whether there was sufficient evidence of probative value to support a conviction. We will affirm the conviction if there is substantial evidence of probative value from which a reasonable trier of fact could have drawn the conclusion that the defendant was guilty of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt. Grim v. State, 797 N.E.2d 825, 830 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (citations omitted). 1 At trial, the State had the burden of proving that Bright knowingly or intentionally possessed cocaine in the amount of three grams or more. Ind. Code

Download Trenell C. Bright v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law