Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Polk

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville

October 23, 2019

STATE OF TENNESSEE
v.
MATT D. POLK

          Session June 18, 2019

          Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dickson County No. 22CC-2016-CR-53 David D. Wolfe, Judge.

         The Defendant, Matt D. Polk, was convicted of one count of the sale of 0.5 grams or more of cocaine and one count of the sale less of than 0.5 grams of cocaine. The Defendant received an effective sentence of twenty-five years. On appeal, the Defendant argues that a video recording was not properly authenticated and that the trial court erred in allowing an expert who had not been disclosed to the defense prior to the day of trial to testify. We conclude that the recording was properly authenticated and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting the testimony, and we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Circuit Court Affirmed.

          Leonard G. Belmares, II, Dickson, Tennessee, for the appellant, Matt D. Polk.

          Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Clark B. Thornton, Senior Assistant Attorney General; W. Ray Crouch, District Attorney General; and Joseph C. Hall, Sr., Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

          John Everett Williams, P.J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which D. Kelly Thomas, Jr., and Robert L. Holloway, Jr., JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, PRESIDING JUDGE.

         FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         The Drug Task Force for the Dickson County Sheriff's Department conducted two separate controlled buys from the Defendant using a confidential informant. Count one of the indictment alleged that on July 17, 2015, the Defendant sold less than 0.5 grams of cocaine, a Schedule II controlled substance. Count two of the indictment alleged that on August 26, 2015, the Defendant sold 0.5 grams or more of cocaine. At trial, the Defendant argued that a casual exchange between two friends, rather than a sale, occurred.

         Agent Chris Freeze with the Drug Task Force testified that on July 17, 2015, the confidential informant met with the Defendant at a residence for the purpose of purchasing crack cocaine. Agent Freeze and Agent Ronnie Moran recorded the confidential informant's transaction with the Defendant using a video recording device, through which they were able to monitor the audio portion of the transaction as it took place. During the direct examination of Agent Freeze, the State played the video recording of the July 17, 2015 transaction. After playing a portion of the video recording, the prosecutor asked Agent Freeze if he recognized the video, and he responded, "Like I said, it's been a while since I have watched it, but yes, I do recognize that as being one of the tapes that we would have had."

         The video showed the confidential informant in her vehicle driving to a residence. When the confidential informant parked her vehicle at the residence, a male voice asked why she was there. The confidential informant told the man that she was "looking" and that she was "needing something bad." At that point, the confidential informant exited the vehicle and stood in the yard with an African-American man, who was later identified by the confidential informant as the Defendant. The confidential informant told the man to "hook [her] up with something real good." The Defendant asked her if she knew anyone who took morphine. The Defendant told her it would take fifteen to twenty minutes for someone to bring the drugs. Throughout the encounter, the confidential informant repeatedly asked how long it would be until the drugs arrived. The Defendant then asked the confidential informant to follow him. She followed him into the tree line to a red and white tent, and both the confidential informant and the Defendant entered the tent.

         After leaving the tent, the confidential informant spoke to another African-American man who was sitting under a carport. The Defendant said "fifteen minutes." The confidential informant asked, "Is it going to take him the whole fifteen minutes to get here." The Defendant walked into the house, and the confidential informant walked back to her vehicle and said, "[H]e has someone bringing it. It's going to take a minute." The video ended abruptly while the confidential informant was talking to the Defendant about an upcoming court date.

         After the recording was played to the jury, defense counsel objected on the basis that Agent Freeze did not testify that "he participated in the recording, that he assisted in the recording, he was present at the recording or anything of that nature." The trial court overruled the objection, finding that Agent Freeze "identified it as one of the tapes that he had reviewed." Agent Freeze testified that he could not see the confidential informant after her car pulled into the driveway but that he and Agent Moran listened to her interaction with the Defendant as it was ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.