Peter Ezebunwa v. State
03-14-00682-CR
Tex. App.Sep 4, 2015Background
- Appellant Peter U. Ezebunwa was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision in 2010 after being arrested with a baggy of crack cocaine (~9 grams). Over several years the State filed multiple motions to adjudicate; this appeal arises from the fifth motion, alleging a new possession offense.
- On April 9, 2014, officers responded to a 911 call reporting drug sales in a backyard/alley; caller identified a primary suspect as an African male nicknamed “E.”
- Officers observed Appellant standing in the alley at night near a folding chair; three other people were about 10 feet away and began to walk away when officers approached.
- An officer kicked over a recently constructed ‘‘rock pile’’ near where Appellant had been standing and recovered a baggie containing ~8 grams of crack cocaine (street value $500–$800).
- Police detained Appellant, found $740 in small-denomination cash in a single stack (Appellant could only account for $199), and noted Appellant’s inconsistent statement that he was merely walking through the alley.
- The trial court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Appellant exercised care, custody, or control of the cocaine and revoked community supervision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence met preponderance standard to show Appellant exercised care, custody, or control of cocaine | State: multiple ‘‘affirmative links’’ (identification by caller, proximity to rock pile, amount/value, cash pattern, inconsistent statements) support possession by preponderance | Appellant: mere presence near contraband insufficient; challenges sufficiency of links | Court: affirmed — preponderance of the evidence showed care/custody/control; revocation not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. State, 911 S.W.2d 744 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (evidence need not exclude all reasonable hypotheses)
- Evans v. State, 202 S.W.3d 158 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (elements of possession: control/care/management and knowledge)
- Rickels v. State, 202 S.W.3d 759 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (standard of review for probation revocation — abuse of discretion and preponderance requirement)
- Poindexter v. State, 153 S.W.3d 402 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (treatment of unobjected-to hearsay in sufficiency review and discussion of affirmative links)