Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville
Session November 15, 2018
from the Circuit Court for Marshall County No. 16-CR-99
Franklin Lee Russell, Judge
bench trial, the Appellant, Katrina Lynette Brown, was found
guilty of driving under the influence, violating the implied
consent law, possessing .5 grams or more of cocaine with the
intent to sell, possessing .5 grams or more of cocaine with
the intent to deliver, and a brake light violation. The trial
court merged the cocaine possession counts and imposed a
total effective sentence of ten years, which was suspended to
probation. On appeal, the Appellant contends that the
evidence is not sufficient to sustain her conviction of
possession of .5 grams or more of cocaine with the intent to
sell. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit
Dalton, Lewisburg, Tennessee (on appeal), and Michael Patrick
Auffinger, Murfreesboro, Tennessee (at trial), for the
Appellant, Katrina Lynnette Brown.
Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Clark
B. Thornton, Senior Counsel; Robert J. Carter, District
Attorney General; and Drew Wright and Joseph Clifford
Johnson, Assistant District Attorneys General, for the
Appellee, State of Tennessee.
McGee Ogle, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which
John Everett Williams, P.J., and Alan E. Glenn, J., joined.
MCGEE OGLE, JUDGE.
Marshall County Grand Jury indicted the Appellant for driving
under the influence (DUI), violating the implied consent law,
possessing .5 grams or more of cocaine with the intent to
sell, possessing .5 grams or more of cocaine with the intent
to deliver, and a brake light violation. The charges were the
result of a traffic stop that occurred in the early morning
of December 18, 2015.
Lonnie Cook with the Lewisburg Police Department testified
that he had been trained in DUI detection. Around 12:50 a.m.
on December 18, 2015, he was driving his patrol car on Water
Street when he saw a white Hyundai turn onto Water Street
from 2nd Avenue. The vehicle, which was traveling in the
opposite direction from Corporal Cook, passed his patrol car
then briefly stopped at a stop sign at the intersection of
Water Street and 3rd Avenue. The intersection was eighty or
one hundred feet from Corporal Cook's patrol car.
Corporal Cook looked into his driver's side mirror and
noticed that the brake light on the driver's side of the
vehicle was not working.
Cook made a U-turn, activated his patrol car's blue
lights, and pursued the vehicle. When the vehicle stopped,
Corporal Cook approached, identified himself, and told the
driver, who was the Appellant, the reason for the stop.
Corporal Cook asked the Appellant for her driver's
license and proof of insurance. The Appellant told Corporal
Cook her name but said that she did not have a driver's
license and that she thought it was suspended. She never
provided proof of insurance. She asked Corporal Cook not to
take her to jail and said that the car belonged to her boss,
for whom she was running errands.
Cook said that during their conversation, he noticed the
Appellant's eyes were bloodshot, and he smelled alcohol
coming from either the Appellant or her vehicle. He asked the
Appellant if she had consumed any alcohol that night, and she
responded that "she had a few wine coolers" but
that "she was fine."
Cook confirmed that the Appellant's driver's license
had been suspended, and he learned that the Appellant had
active warrants for her arrest. By that time, Officer Clint
Newbill had arrived on the scene. Corporal Cook asked the
Appellant to step outside and walk to the rear of the
vehicle. When she complied, Corporal Cook noticed that she
was very unsteady and had to hold on to the car for balance
as she walked to the rear of the vehicle. As she walked by
Corporal Cook, he smelled alcohol and a strong odor of
marijuana. He asked the Appellant if she had any marijuana,
and she responded that she did not use drugs. He thought the
Appellant seemed nervous. Corporal Cook and Officer Newbill
handcuffed the Appellant because of the active warrants and
Cook said that the Appellant did not follow his commands and
that he had to repeat himself "multiple times."
When Corporal Cook asked again if the Appellant had any
marijuana, she responded, "Yes, it's in the glove
compartment of the car." Officer Newbill went to the car
to retrieve the marijuana. The Appellant then turned and
started to walk away from Corporal Cook. He had to order her
to stop multiple times. Corporal Cook said that the
Appellant's hands were cuffed behind her back. As she
turned, she tilted her body to the right and reached
underneath her shirt. Corporal Cook grabbed the
Appellant's arms to stop her, and a pack of Newport
cigarettes fell from her shirt. The Appellant said,
"There it is, there it is, just take me to jail."
Corporal Cook looked inside the pack and saw a yellow bag and
a clear bag. The bags contained approximately 2.8 grams of
marijuana and approximately 3.7 grams of crack cocaine,
respectively. The officers searched the Appellant's car
but found no drug paraphernalia.
Cook said that after Corporal Amanda Binkley arrived, she
took the Appellant to jail. Corporal Cook later went to the
jail, told the Appellant that he believed she was under the
influence of an intoxicant, read the implied consent form to
her, and asked her to perform field sobriety tests. The
Appellant refused to perform the field sobriety tests or
provide a blood sample. Corporal Cook stated that cash was
found on the Appellant's person at the jail, but he did
not state the amount.
Cook said that he charged the Appellant with driving on a
suspended license, DUI, possession of a schedule II substance
with the intent to sell, possession of a schedule VI
substance, and violation of the implied consent law. He
explained that he charged the Appellant with possession of a
schedule II substance with the intent to sell because of the
amount of crack cocaine in her possession and because no drug
paraphernalia was found in her possession. Corporal Cook
explained that a person possessing crack cocaine for personal
use usually had a "crack pipe, a little glass pipe"
for smoking the crack cocaine. He also noted that a person
possessing crack cocaine for personal use typically had
"just a little piece or two," but the Appellant
possessed "quite a large amount."
cross-examination, Corporal Cook acknowledged that an
aluminum soda can could be used to smoke marijuana, "but
they're usually bent and they've got holes punched in
them and burn marks on them." When he searched the
Appellant's vehicle, he did ...