Reggie Thomas Johnson v. State of Indiana (mem. dec)
18A02-1607-CR-1712
| Ind. Ct. App. | May 30, 2017Background
- Reggie Johnson was tried after police conducted a controlled buy at Bestway Inn room 135; the buy involved the confidential informant purchasing heroin from an acquaintance (Jordan) on November 10, 2014.
- Johnson had been using room 135 for about two weeks, according to witnesses who saw him sell drugs there and who let him use the room in exchange for contraband.
- After the controlled buy, Johnson got into a black Chevrolet Tahoe with driver Kayley Hesher and Jordan; police stopped the Tahoe because Johnson had an active warrant.
- Officer Jett smelled raw marijuana from the Tahoe, arrested Johnson, and found $875 (including marked buy money) and Xanax on Johnson; a search of the Tahoe produced 4.05 g cocaine, 57.97 g marijuana, scales, two cell phones, and pill baggies.
- Johnson was convicted by a jury of dealing in cocaine (Level 4 felony) and possession of marijuana (Class B misdemeanor); he appealed challenging (1) admission of pre-November 10 acts, (2) the inventory search of the Tahoe, and (3) sufficiency of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Johnson) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of two‑week conduct at hotel | Evidence was intrinsic/inextricably intertwined and completes the story of Nov. 10 | Prior acts were other‑acts evidence and unfairly prejudicial; not intrinsic | Trial court did not abuse discretion; evidence completed the story and was properly admitted |
| Validity of inventory/search of Tahoe | Search lawful; Johnson lacks standing to challenge vehicle search as a nonowner passenger | The inventory/search violated Fourth Amendment/IN Const. art. 1 § 11 | Johnson lacked standing to challenge the vehicle search; Fourth Amendment claim rejected |
| Sufficiency to prove constructive possession of marijuana | Circumstantial evidence (odor, proximity, cash including marked bills, scales, phones, commingling) supports constructive possession and intent to deliver | Evidence insufficient to show Johnson knew of/nondisputed possession or intent to deliver | Evidence sufficient for constructive possession of marijuana and cocaine; conviction affirmed |
| Admission under Rule 403 (prejudice vs probative) | Even if Rule 403 argued, probative value outweighed prejudice | Evidence was unduly prejudicial and should have been excluded | Trial court did not abuse discretion under Rule 403 |
Key Cases Cited
- Guilmette v. State, 14 N.E.3d 38 (Ind. 2014) (standard of review for evidentiary rulings)
- Bennett v. State, 5 N.E.3d 498 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (intrinsic / completing the story doctrine)
- United States v. Strong, 485 F.3d 985 (7th Cir. 2007) (when acts are inextricably intertwined under Rule 404(b))
- Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (U.S. 1978) (standing to challenge vehicle search)
- Campos v. State, 885 N.E.2d 590 (Ind. 2008) (passenger’s standing to challenge vehicle searches)
- Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. 2007) (sufficiency review standard)
- Wright v. State, 828 N.E.2d 904 (Ind. 2005) (consider conflicting evidence in light most favorable to conviction)
- Jenkins v. State, 726 N.E.2d 268 (Ind. 2000) (reasonable trier of fact standard)
- Gray v. State, 957 N.E.2d 171 (Ind. 2011) (statement of sufficiency standard)
- Wilkerson v. State, 918 N.E.2d 458 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (nonexhaustive factors for constructive possession)
- Holmes v. State, 785 N.E.2d 658 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (proximity supports capability to control contraband)
- Johnson v. State, 59 N.E.3d 1071 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (knowledge of contraband as element of possession)