Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

598 So. 2d 1054

Davis v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided April 17, 1992

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · decided 1992-04-17

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“"The evidence before the jury indicated that Pilley had been in the Changing Times Lounge previously, and that he knew the layout of the bar. (R. 364.) There was testimony that the night of the murders he had been overheard discussing obtaining weapons and `easy money.' (R. 379.) Witnesses saw him and Andrew Apicella in the Changing Times Lounge late on the night of the murders. Witnesses described him as acting nervous during the evening. At one time, he asked a bar patron if Edward Dodd owned the bar and whether Dodd was carrying a gun. (R. 441.) Evidence indicated that two weapons were used in the murders; the position of the bodies of the victims when found indicated the five victims had been separated —the Dodds were killed in the pool-table area of the bar, and the three customers were killed on the other side of the establishment. That the victims appeared to have been laid on their faces with their heads in their hands before being shot in the head indicates that they had been deliberately `executed' by their killers. Later that evening, Pilley and Apicella split approximately $300, including five $2 bills, similar to the bills that one of the murder victims had kept in his wallet. (R. 521.) Later, the Apicella family's lawyer turned over to the police jewelry belonging to Pamela Dodd. "Accepting as true all the evidence introduced by the State, and according the State all legitimate inferences therefrom, and viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the pro”

quoted by 2 later decisions, including Ex Parte Pilley, Reid v. State

“any conflict in testimony between witnesses as to the facts presents a jury question and in no way undermines the sufficiency of the State's evidence.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 606 So. 2d 198 - Finley v. State

Relies on 555 So. 2d 818 - Johnson v. State · 485 So. 2d 787 - Ex Parte Wilhite · 469 So. 2d 713 - Jones v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1992-04-17

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably 730 So. 2d 652 - Ex Parte Woodall (1998), 971 So. 2d 43 - Robitaille v. State (2005)

26 state decisions

140199220002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1

¶2Lawrence Eugene Davis, alias Lawrence Strickland, was indicted for the offense of unlawful distribution of a controlled substance, in violation of § 13A-12-211, Code *1055 of Alabama 1975. The jury found Davis guilty as charged in the indictment, and he was sentenced as a habitual offender to a term of 15 years' imprisonment.

¶3The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to convict Davis based upon the presence of alibi evidence and contradictions or errors in the testimony of an eyewitness.

¶4The test used in determining the sufficiency of evidence to sustain a conviction is whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational finder of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Johnson v. State, 555 So.2d 818 (Ala.Cr.App. 1989).

¶5In the case sub judice, the State presented an eyewitness, Alcoholic Beverage Control Board enforcement officer John Richardson, who testified that, while acting in his capacity as an undercover agent, he received three pieces of crack cocaine from Davis, for which he paid Davis $60. Establishing the proper chain of custody, the State then presented expert testimony that the three objects that Richardson purchased from Davis were in actuality crack cocaine.

¶6Although Davis presented alibi evidence that he was painting his sister's house at the time the alleged drug purchase occurred, any conflict in testimony between witnesses as to the facts presents a jury question and in no way undermines the sufficiency of the State's evidence. Wilhite v. State,485 So.2d 777, 781 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985), aff'd, 485 So.2d 787 (Ala. 1986).

¶7Likewise, although Davis presented evidence that he was shorter and weighed less than Agent Richardson's estimates of the height and weight of the man from whom he purchased the cocaine, these apparent inconsistencies are not sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury as to the truth of the testimony of Agent Richardson. Walters v. State,24 Ala. App. 370, 373, 135 So. 600, 602-03 (1931). The weight to be given Agent Richardson's testimony is for the trier of fact to determine. Jones v. State, 469 So.2d 713 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985).

¶8We, therefore, hold that the evidence presented by the State was clearly sufficient to support the jury's verdict of unlawful distribution of a controlled substance.

¶9The foregoing opinion was prepared by the Honorable JAMES H. FAULKNER, a former Alabama Supreme Court Justice, and his opinion is hereby adopted as that of the court.

¶10The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

¶11AFFIRMED.

¶12All Judges concur.

/598/so2d/1054 · .json · Public domain