Jackson v. StateJackson v. State
Annie Lou Jackson appeals her conviction of sale of cocaine; she enumerates two errors. Held:
1. Appellant’s enumeration of error based on insufficiency of the evidence is without merit. The arresting officer testified it was appellant who had actually sold him the small rock of crack cocaine. When arrested both appellant and another person who had been present at the crime scene at the time of the sale were found in possession of some of the money which was paid by the arresting officer for the cocaine. On appeal the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to support the verdict, and appellant no longer enjoys a presumption of innocence; moreover, an appellate court determines evidence sufficiency and does not weigh the evidence or determine witness credibility.
Grant v. State,
2. The trial court did not err, as enumerated, by declining to charge the jury as to the lesser included offense of possession of cocaine.
(a) A timely, written request to charge a lesser included offense must be made by application to the trial judge at or before the close of the evidence.
Examination of appellant’s requests to charge, as contained in the trial record, reveals that no tailored written request for a charge as to the lesser included offense of possession of cocaine was submitted therewith. None of appellant’s submitted charge requests would be accurate or apt as a lesser included offense charge. Therefore, the trial court did not err in refusing to give a lesser included offense instruction using such language.
James v. State,
(b) Additionally, “a written request to charge a lesser included offense must always be given if there is any evidence that the defendant is guilty of the lesser included offense.”
State v. Alvarado,
supra at 564. However, contrary to appellant’s contention the evidence at trial does not reasonably raise the lesser included offense of possession of cocaine. The arresting officer’s direct testimony that appellant sold him drugs was not controverted. The transcript reveals that appellant had previously provided information about other drug users, that he was addicted to drugs, that other persons at the crime scene had police records for prior drug sales and that, at the time of arrest, one of these persons also was found in possession of some of the drug sale money. However, this evidence standing alone does not reasonably raise an issue that appellant was guilty of a lesser included offense of possession of rock cocaine, within the meaning of
State v. Alvarado,
supra. “Where, as here, the evidence shows either the commission of the completed offense as charged, or the commission of no offense, the trial court is not required to charge the jury on a lesser
*172
included offense.”
Peebles v. State,
Appellant’s enumerations of error are without merit.
Judgment affirmed.