7 results for 'cat:"Drug Offender" AND cat:"Evidence" AND cat:"Due Process"'.
J. Zimmerman finds defendant's due process rights were not violated when the trial court failed to record in-chambers discussions held with both parties. He offers only speculative arguments as to why the contents of these discussions would benefit him or prove prejudice. Meanwhile, although a portion of lab tests were inconclusive as to whether the substance trafficked by defendant was cocaine, testimony from the confidential informant and defendant's own assertion during the drug sale the substance was cocaine was sufficient for the jury to convict him of drug trafficking. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Zimmerman, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-1333, Categories: drug Offender, evidence, due Process
J. Harrison finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for possession of meth based on sufficient evidence. Defendant was found by his parole officer during a home visit to be under the influence of and in possession of meth. Furthermore, the jury properly declined defendant's challenge to evidence sufficiency based on the inability of the officer who measured amounts of the drug to testify, who was killed in the line of duty. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Harrison , Filed On: January 24, 2024, Case #: CR-22-732, Categories: drug Offender, evidence, due Process
J. Klappenbach finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for possession of meth and drug paraphernalia within 1,000 feet of a church. The arresting officer testified that a controlled buy of meth at defendant’s residence, where a confidential informant was fitted with a video-recording device, yielded $100 worth of meth. Ample evidence presented supports the convictions. Defendant’s acquittal on the drug possession with the purpose to deliver charge did not foreclose convictions for possession of paraphernalia. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Klappenbach, Filed On: October 4, 2023, Case #: CR-22-667, Categories: drug Offender, evidence, due Process
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Hess finds the trial court did not violate defendant's due process rights during his drug trafficking case when it denied his motion for a new trial after the state amended its indictment to remove location identifiers. Although his defense centered around where drugs and firearms were discovered by police, he knew the locations of the evidence more than a year before the trial began and was still free to make his arguments regardless of the language used in the indictment. Meanwhile, the amounts of fentanyl compounds found in the apartment safe and BMW, a vehicle defendant admitted he bought with "drug money," along with defendant's other admissions to police about his criminal activities, were sufficient to convict him. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Hess, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2331, Categories: drug Offender, evidence, due Process
J. Ayers finds defendant was properly convicted of one count of possession with intent to sell or deliver heroin within 1,000 feet of a drug free school zone, possession of more than 14.175 grams of marijuana with intent to sell or deliver, and possession of drug paraphernalia. Defendant claims his right to due process was violated as his trial was delayed more than five years, but because he contributed to the delay and was not prejudiced by it, he is not entitled to relief. Evidence is sufficient to support defendant’s convictions and effective sentence to 30 years confinement, all other arguments are waived. Affirmed.
Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Ayers, Filed On: May 18, 2023, Case #: E2021-01106-CCA-R3-CD, Categories: drug Offender, evidence, due Process