Joseph Frank Tooker v. State, 03-17-00348-CR

Background

During a nighttime traffic stop Officer Fidel Morua arrested Joseph Frank Tooker after finding a baggie of methamphetamine on the ground near Tooker and his girlfriend, Chelsa Hazle.
Hazle testified she and Tooker purchased methamphetamine, that she hid meth in her bra, and that she slipped a small transparent baggie into Tooker’s hand while being arrested so it wouldn’t be found on her in jail.
Body- and dashcam video recorded Tooker hugging/kissing Hazle, receiving something in his hand, continuing to kiss her, then tossing an object out of officers’ immediate view; officers later found the baggie and lab testing confirmed methamphetamine.
Tooker testified he did not want the baggie, dropped it because he didn’t want to be implicated, and did not try to conceal it or tell officers.
A jury convicted Tooker of possession of a controlled substance (state-jail felony) and tampering with physical evidence (third-degree felony); the court assessed prison terms but placed him on community supervision; Tooker appealed claiming legal insufficiency.

Issues

Issue	Tooker’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for possession of a controlled substance	Evidence relied on accomplice Hazle and was insufficient to show Tooker knowingly exercised control over the drugs or intended possession; his handling was fleeting and he abandoned the drugs	Video, Tooker’s admissions, and circumstances (prior knowledge of Hazle’s drug use, receiving item, continued conduct, failure to notify police) corroborate accomplice testimony and show control/knowledge; alternative liability under law of parties	Conviction for possession affirmed — evidence legally sufficient to prove knowing possession or liability as party
Sufficiency of evidence for tampering with physical evidence	Tossing the baggie was mere abandonment/dispossession, not concealment with intent to impair evidence availability; no proof of intent to hide from investigation	Circumstances (ongoing police investigation, timing, small transparent baggie, darkness, Tooker’s furtive gestures, continued kissing/holding to avoid attention, officers initially did not see bag) permit reasonable inference of intent to conceal and impair availability	Conviction for tampering affirmed — evidence legally sufficient to permit inference of intent to impair availability of evidence

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for legal sufficiency review)
Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (circumstantial evidence evaluated cumulatively)
Clayton v. State, 235 S.W.3d 772 (deference to jury’s resolution of conflicting inferences)
Kiffe v. State, 361 S.W.3d 104 (circumstantial evidence as probative as direct evidence)
DeLay v. State, 465 S.W.3d 232 (hypothetically correct jury charge standard)
Cocke v. State, 201 S.W.3d 744 (accomplice as matter of law when indicted for same offense)
Medina v. State, 7 S.W.3d 633 (definition and treatment of accomplice testimony)
Smith v. State, 332 S.W.3d 425 (article 38.14 corroboration: non-accomplice evidence must tend to connect accused)
Castillo v. State, 221 S.W.3d 689 (eliminate accomplice testimony when testing corroboration)
Knox v. State, 934 S.W.2d 678 (view non-accomplice evidence in light most favorable to verdict)
Poindexter v. State, 153 S.W.3d 402 (elements for unlawful possession: control and knowledge)
Reed v. State, 769 S.W.2d 323 (intent inferred from acts, words, conduct)
Thornton v. State, 425 S.W.3d 289 (not every discarding shows intent to impair; jury may choose reasonable inference)
Laster v. State, 275 S.W.3d 512 (factfinder chooses between dispossession and concealment inferences)
Lemarr v. State, 487 S.W.3d 324 (concealability and context support tampering inference)
Evans v. State, 202 S.W.3d 158 (non-exhaustive factors that may support constructive possession)
Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26 (court has authority to reform clerical errors in judgment)