455 So. 2d 991 | Ala. Crim. App. | 1984
Charles Edward Wooten was indicted and convicted for trafficking in cannabis. Sentence was three years' imprisonment and a $25,000 fine. On appeal, Wooten contends that the search warrant was *992 based on information obtained in a previous illegal and warrantless search.
Prior to the obtaining and execution of the search warrant, A.B.C. Agent Harvey Turner had personally observed a large number of marijuana plants growing behind Wooten's residence.
Turner testified that he received information that there was marijuana growing "up there". He went out to the area and observed the marijuana. He stated that "(a)ctually, I never did get on Mr. Wooten's property. I don't believe. You can stand across the fence and observe the marijuana. I'm not, I'm not even sure I was on his property. I don't think I was." Turner never did "get in" the plants, he "just observed them from a distance."
In Oliver v. United States, ___ U.S ___,
Here, the six different plots of marijuana were not in an area immediately surrounding Wooten's mobile home and could not be seen from his trailer.
Wooten pled guilty to the indictment charging trafficking after the trial judge denied his motion to suppress. The plea was entered with "the understanding we are not waiving any rights to an appeal concerning the Court's ruling on the search and seizure." See Bailey v. State,
A voluntary and intelligent plea of guilty is conclusive as to the defendant's guilt, constitutes an admission of all facts sufficiently charged in the indictment, and obviates the necessity of proof by the State. Dingler v. State,
The record shows that the guilty plea was intelligently, knowingly, and voluntarily entered. Wooten does not contend otherwise. He cannot now complain that the State failed to prove that he was in possession of more than 2.2 pounds of marijuana.
The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
All Judges concur.