Jones v. State

182 S.W.3d 485, 357 Ark. 545 (2004) · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 27, 2004 · No. CR 03-1129

Summary

The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed Jonah Vaughn Jones's convictions for possession of methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia, holding that the evidence supported constructive possession and possession of a usable amount of methamphetamine. The court also held that the trial court improperly used a habitual-offender jury instruction that omitted the statutory option of imposing only a fine, and it remanded for resentencing on that issue.

Court
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Writing for the Court
Ray Thornton; Glaze; Corbin; Imber
Jurisdiction
Arkansas
Decision date
May 27, 2004
Docket number
CR 03-1129
Procedural posture
Criminal appeal from jury convictions for possession of methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and the penalty-phase jury instructions.
Standard of review
A motion for directed verdict is treated as a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. The appellate court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and considers only evidence supporting the verdict; the verdict is upheld if supported by substantial evidence, whether direct or circumstantial.
Precedential value
published precedential opinion
Parties
Jonah Vaughn Jones v. State of Arkansas
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

criminal procedureevidencestandard of reviewsentencingjury instructions

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureevidencesentencingappellate practice

Questions Presented

  1. Whether substantial evidence established that Jones constructively possessed the methamphetamine found behind the driver's seat of the jointly occupied vehicle.
  2. Whether the evidence established a usable amount of methamphetamine sufficient to support a possession conviction.
  3. Whether substantial evidence established that the syringe found in Jones's pocket was drug paraphernalia possessed with intent to use it to inject methamphetamine.
  4. Whether the trial court erred by instructing the penalty-phase jury under AMCI 2d 9202, which did not allow consideration of a fine alone for an habitual offender.

Holdings

  1. Substantial evidence supported Jones's conviction for constructive possession because he was driving the vehicle, the methamphetamine was found directly behind the driver's seat, and a syringe associated with methamphetamine use was found on his person.
  2. The evidence was sufficient to establish a usable amount of methamphetamine under Harbison because the substance could be weighed and tested and totaled 0.8839 grams of a methamphetamine compound.
  3. Substantial evidence supported the drug-paraphernalia conviction because the syringe was found in Jones's pocket, was near methamphetamine, and expert testimony established that syringes are commonly used to inject methamphetamine.
  4. The trial court erroneously instructed the jury under AMCI 2d 9202 because Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-104(d) authorized the jury to consider imposing a fine alone, even though Jones was an habitual offender.

Key quotations

Thus, AMCI 2d 9202 does not accurately reflect the law in effect after 1993. (at 492)
We have said that our criminal jury instructions do not trump the plain language of our criminal statutes. (at 492)
Affirm in part; reverse and remand in part. (at 493)

Factual background

Fort Smith police stopped a red Chevrolet pickup truck driven by Jones, who was accompanied by two other occupants. During a pat-down search, an officer found a syringe in Jones's pocket, and a search of the truck uncovered five plastic bags containing methamphetamine residue behind the driver's seat. A chemist testified that the bags contained a total of 0.8839 grams of a methamphetamine-nicotinamide compound, and a narcotics detective testified that syringes are commonly used to inject methamphetamine. Jones denied possession and challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, including whether the substance constituted a usable amount.

Procedural history

Jones was convicted by a jury of possession of methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia and was sentenced as an habitual offender to consecutive terms of eight and ten years. The trial court denied his motions for directed verdict and rejected his proposed penalty-phase instructions allowing the jury to impose only a fine. The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the guilt-phase convictions but held that the penalty-phase instruction was erroneous and remanded for resentencing.

Remand instructions

Remand for resentencing in the penalty phase using an accurate instruction that permits the jury to consider the sentencing options authorized by Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-104(d), including payment of a fine alone. The guilt-phase convictions are affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…