State of Tennessee v. Madaryl Dewayne Hampton
W2019-01551-CCA-R3-CD
| Tenn. Crim. App. | Jul 12, 2021Background
- On Jan. 20, 2018, JPD Officer Terry Troutt responded to an apartment complex on a tip about a person with a warrant; he followed Madaryl Hampton among a group of men.
- Officer Troutt observed Hampton move his arms, make a throwing motion, and saw a handgun and a small plastic bag (suspected marijuana) land on the ground; Troutt recovered a wet, muddy, loaded handgun and the bag nearby.
- Hampton was detained, searched: $470 in cash was found on his person; later a set of black digital scales with marijuana residue was recovered at the jail. Hampton stipulated he had a prior felony conviction.
- The charges were severed: Hampton was convicted in an earlier trial of simple possession of marijuana; in the trial at issue he was convicted on four counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm, counts merged, and sentenced to twenty-four years.
- On appeal Hampton raised (1) plain error challenge to admission of marijuana, scales, and cash; (2) plain error challenge to prosecutorial vouching in closing; and (3) insufficiency of the evidence to prove constructive possession.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Hampton) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of marijuana, scales, and cash | Evidence was relevant to possession of the gun (makes possession more probable) and harmless as to scales/cash | Evidence was irrelevant, highly prejudicial, and rendered severance meaningless; plain error in admission | Admission of the thrown bag of marijuana was relevant; scales/cash harmless given proof of guilt; no plain error relief granted |
| Prosecutorial vouching in closing | Comments did not rise to plain error; jury instructions and presumption of following them cured any harm | Prosecutor repeatedly called officer "credible" and Hampton "incredible," improperly vouching and warranting plain error relief | Statements were improper but not so inflammatory or prejudicial in context to warrant plain error reversal (no relief) |
| Sufficiency — constructive possession of firearm | Officer Troutt saw Hampton throw the gun and recovered it where he observed it land; circumstantial evidence supports dominion/control | Argues constructive possession not established (other people present; officer misidentification) | Viewing evidence in State's favor, a rational jury could find Hampton exercised dominion and control; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Smith, 24 S.W.3d 274 (Tenn. 2000) (plain error doctrine and factors)
- State v. James, 81 S.W.3d 751 (Tenn. 2002) (relevance standard for admissibility)
- State v. Chalmers, 28 S.W.3d 913 (Tenn. 2000) (factors for assessing prejudicial effect of prosecutorial argument)
- State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011) (sufficiency review principles for circumstantial evidence)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- State v. Robinson, 400 S.W.3d 529 (Tenn. 2013) (constructive possession principles)
- State v. Bane, 57 S.W.3d 411 (Tenn. 2001) (prosecutorial misconduct requires prejudice to reverse)
- State v. Goltz, 111 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003) (prohibition on prosecutor vouching and witness endorsement)