Thompson v. State
2012 Ind. App. LEXIS 133
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Thompson was charged in FA-23467 with Conspiracy to Dealing in Cocaine, Dealing in Cocaine (Class A), Possession of Cocaine (Class C), Possession of Cocaine and a Firearm (Class C), Carrying a Handgun without a License (Class C), Driving While Suspended (Class A misdemeanor), and Carrying a Firearm without a License (Class A misdemeanor; DW suspended charged in CM-18160 was for the same offense but in a separate case).
- Thompson pled guilty to Driving While Suspended in CM-18160 on September 9, 2010; on January 24, 2011 he moved to dismiss FA-23467 under Indiana’s successive prosecution statute, which the trial court denied on January 28, 2011.
- On April 18, 2011, the State dismissed some counts and conducted voir dire, during which the State peremptorily challenged two African-American jurors, prompting Batson concerns.
- A mistrial motion based on Batson concerns was denied; Thompson renewed the motion to dismiss under the successive-prosecution statute, and the trial court dismissed the charges at that time.
- A jury later convicted Thompson of Dealing in Cocaine (Class A) after trial from May 2–6, 2011; sentencing followed on May 31, 2011, with a 35-year sentence, 10 years suspended to probation.
- Key factual backdrop includes surveillance of 4210 Carrollton, discovery of extensive drug-related items and weapons, Thompson’s presence at the residence, false identification, use of the attic to move between units, and evidence supporting constructive possession.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court abused its discretion in denying the motion to dismiss under the successive-prosecution statute | Thompson | Thompson | No abuse; no single-transaction linkage, so dismissal not required |
| Whether the Batson challenges to two African-American jurors were properly overruled | Thompson | State | Trial court did not err in permitting the peremptory challenges |
| Whether there is sufficient evidence Thompson knowingly possessed with intent to deliver cocaine | Thompson | State | Sufficient evidence of constructive possession and intent to exercise control |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. State, 762 N.E.2d 1216 (Ind. 2002) (joinder and successive-prosecution considerations in Indiana)
- State v. Wiggins, 661 N.E.2d 878 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996) (single-transaction and joinder principles within Indiana)
- Allen v. State, 956 N.E.2d 195 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (joining related offenses; scheme analysis)
- Gee v. State, 810 N.E.2d 338 (Ind. 2004) (factors supporting knowledge of contraband)
- Lampkins v. State, 682 N.E.2d 1268 (Ind. 1997) (evidence of possession and control factors)
- Killebrew v. State, 925 N.E.2d 399 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (Batson-related review and scrutiny of race-neutral explanations)
- Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (U.S. 2008) ( heightened scrutiny of peremptory-strike explanations)