Rebecca Plumlee v. State
02-17-00174-CR
| Tex. App. | Dec 21, 2017Background
- On July 8, 2014, Rebecca Plumlee was found at a truck yard by Officer Cody Stone wearing minimal clothing and with two men; witness Breeding and officer observed signs the group were "on something."
- Plumlee gave verbal consent to a search; Officer Stone searched her purse and found two small baggies and a wrapper containing suspected narcotics; he booked and arrested her for possession of a controlled substance (penalty group 1).
- DPS forensic scientist William Todsen tested the items and reported they contained 1.57 grams of methamphetamine; his lab report listed the offense date July 8, 2014.
- Todsen testified methamphetamine is a penalty group 1 controlled substance; Officer Stone noted on packaging “two small packages of methamphetamines.”
- Plumlee admitted the purse was hers, claimed she had been separated from it at a party where others used drugs, and denied knowing about the drugs; jury convicted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Plumlee) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State was required to allege or prove the penalty group for methamphetamine in the indictment | State: Not required; once the State proved possession of meth on a date certain, it was the judge’s duty to apply governing law (penalty group) in the jury charge | Plumlee: State failed to prove meth was in penalty group 1 on the offense date; expert testimony only established current law, not status on offense date | Court: State need not allege/prove penalty group; judge properly charged jury and, viewed favorably to verdict, evidence showed meth was penalty group 1 on the offense date |
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove Plumlee knowingly possessed methamphetamine | State: Meth found in an intimate container (her purse) that Plumlee admitted was hers and she possessed when arrested; signs of meth use and rejected alibi support knowing possession | Plumlee: Denied knowledge; claimed separation from purse, and challenged sufficiency linking her to the drugs | Court: Evidence sufficient—purse was in Plumlee’s control, forensic and packaging evidence tied substance to offense date, witness/officer observations and jury credibility findings support knowing possession |
Key Cases Cited
- Doyle v. State, 631 S.W.2d 732 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982) (court’s duty to apply law in jury charge)
- Rodriguez v. State, 799 S.W.2d 301 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (waiver of indictment defects by failure to object before trial)
- Parker v. State, 192 S.W.3d 801 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (drugs found in defendant’s purse can support knowing possession)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (sufficiency review standard—view evidence in light most favorable to verdict)
- Jones v. State, 944 S.W.2d 642 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (jury as exclusive judge of witness credibility)