Collins v. StateCollins v. State
Frank Collins was indicted for the offense of unlawful distribution of a controlled substance in violation of
I
Collins contends that the trial court erred in admitting, over Collins’s objection, evidence of a prior sale of a controlled substance by Collins to an undercover agent.
In response to the prosecutor’s question, Agent John Richardson of the Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control Board testified
Because Collins’s objection to this question was made after the question had been answered, Collins has failed to preserve this issue for appellate review. Thompson v. State,
We note that even if this issue had been properly preserved for review, evidence of distinct and independent offenses is admissible in the trial of a person accused of a specific crime when its purpose is to establish identity. Briggs v. State,
II
Collins contends that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence the white powdery substance labeled “State’s Exhibit 1” prior to expert testimony which identified the substance as cocaine and which properly established the chain of custody as to the exhibit.
Although we agree that State’s Exhibit 1 should not have been admitted until after the identification and chain of custody predicates had been established, Collins failed to object to the premature admission of the evidence.
“The trial court is not in error if inadmissible testimony comes in without objection and without a ruling thereon appearing in the record. The testimony is thus generally admissible and not limited as to weight or purpose.” Ex parte Neal,
Ill
Collins contends that there was insufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of unlawful distribution of a controlled substance. We disagree.
“In determining the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction, this court must accept as true the evidence introduced by the state, accord the state all legitimate inferences therefrom, and consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution.” Faircloth v. State,
“(a) A person commits the crime of unlawful distribution of controlled substances if, except as otherwise authorized, he sells, furnishes, gives away, manufactures, delivers or distributes a controlled substance enumerated in schedules I through V [§§ 20-2-20 through 20-2-31].”
After examining the evidence and applying the proper standards of review, we find there was sufficient evidence presented by the state to allow the jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Collins was guilty of the crime as charged. In particular, Agent Richardson testified that Collins sold him .081 grams of a rock-like substance purported to be “crack” cocaine for $20.00 on the night of July 19, 1989. The forensic expert further testified, after establishing the proper chain of custody, that the rock-like substance which Richardson purchased from Collins was cocaine, a controlled substance. Thence, the
The foregoing opinion was prepared by JAMES H. FAULKNER, a Retired Justice, Supreme Court of Alabama, serving as a judge of this court, and his opinion is adopted as that of this court.
The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.