Albert Kimble v. State
This text of Albert Kimble v. State (Albert Kimble v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FIRST DIVISION BARNES, P. J., GOBEIL and PIPKIN, JJ.
NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules
DEADLINES ARE NO LONGER TOLLED IN THIS COURT. ALL FILINGS MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN THE TIMES SET BY OUR COURT RULES.
August 28, 2020
In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A20A1329. KIMBLE v. THE STATE.
GOBEIL, Judge.
Following a jury trial, Albert Kimble was convicted of one count of possession
of cocaine. Kimble filed a motion for a new trial, as amended, which the trial court
denied. On appeal, Kimble argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his
conviction. We find merit in this contention and reverse.
“On appeal from a criminal conviction, we view the evidence in the light most
favorable to the verdict, with the defendant no longer enjoying a presumption of
innocence.” Reese v. State, 270 Ga. App. 522, 523 (607 SE2d 165) (2004). We
neither weigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses, but determine only
“whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution,
any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307, 319 (III) (B) (99 SCt 2781,
61 LE2d 560) (1979) (emphasis omitted).
So viewed, the evidence presented at trial shows that in May 2017, Kevin
Floyd, who had worked with Kimble for several years, moved into Kimble’s trailer.
On May 18, 2017, less than two weeks after Floyd moved in with Kimble, the two
men went to a friend’s house and consumed alcohol. Later that evening, Kimble and
Floyd began arguing, a physical altercation ensued, and Floyd left the apartment in
his vehicle. Floyd called 911 and claimed that Kimble had pistol whipped him.
Officers took a statement from Floyd, and subsequently made contact with Kimble
at his residence. Kimble agreed to allow officers to search the residence, and there,
in a tall dresser drawer, an officer discovered a paper bag containing two crack pipes.
The officer did not ask Kimble whether the crack pipes belonged to him. Chemical
testing confirmed the presence of cocaine in the samples tested.
Based on the foregoing, a Hall County grand jury charged Kimble with one
count each of possession of cocaine, aggravated assault, and battery. The jury found
him guilty of possession of cocaine, and not guilty on the remaining counts, and the
trial court entered a judgment of conviction on the jury’s verdict. Kimble filed a
2 motion for a new trial, as amended, which the trial court denied following a hearing.
This appeal followed.
In his sole claim of error, Kimble argues that the evidence was insufficient to
support his conviction because the State failed to prove that he was in actual or
constructive possession of the cocaine found in the trailer. Emphasizing the lack of
evidence that the cocaine was discovered in his room, he asserts that any evidence of
constructive possession was purely circumstantial, and the evidence submitted to the
jury did not rule out all other reasonable hypotheses except for Kimble’s guilt.
At trial, the officer who discovered the crack pipes in Kimble’s trailer testified
that he did not ask Kimble if the crack pipes were his, nor did the State present
evidence that the room in which the contraband was found was Kimble’s. Indeed, the
officer admitted that it was equally likely that the pipes belonged to Kimble or Floyd
because they both lived in the trailer. And, on appeal, the State concedes there was
insufficient evidence to support the conviction for possession of cocaine and the State
failed to meet its burden to rule out all other hypotheses. Accordingly, we reverse this
conviction. See Francis v. State, 231 Ga. App. 112, 113 (1) (497 SE2d 827) (1998)
(reversing conviction for possession of marijuana because the State failed to present
sufficient evidence to connect defendant to bedroom where marijuana was found).
3 Judgment reversed. Barnes, P. J., and Pipkin, J., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Albert Kimble v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albert-kimble-v-state-gactapp-2020.