Query v. State

456 S.E.2d 704, 217 Ga. App. 61, 95 Fulton County D. Rep. 1461, 1995 Ga. App. LEXIS 340
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 17, 1995
DocketA94A2661
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 456 S.E.2d 704 (Query 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.

Bluebook
Query v. State, 456 S.E.2d 704, 217 Ga. App. 61, 95 Fulton County D. Rep. 1461, 1995 Ga. App. LEXIS 340 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

Ruffin, Judge.

James Query was convicted of manufacturing methamphetamine and possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute in violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act. He appeals from the judgment of conviction and sentence and the denial of his motion for new trial.

Viewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence shows that Query was part of a criminal enterprise which used a car repair business as a front for a drug operation engaged in the manufacture and sale of methamphetamine.

Between October 22, 1988 and May 2, 1989, at the request of a postal inspector, Douglas County Sheriff’s Detective Scott Cosper and a narcotics detecting dog inspected numerous packages which were mailed to and from Query at his Douglas County address. Many of the packages were sent to and from Florida. Each time the dog detected the presence of illegal drugs. During that period, Cosper drove by Query’s residence several times and observed Query and an older model black and white Camaro on the premises. Cosper had also observed Query driving a red Nissan 300 ZX.

On May 3, 1989, Cosper participated in a search by federal postal *62 authorities of Query’s home. When Cosper arrived, Query had been handcuffed and was lying on the ground. Searching Query’s bedroom, Cosper discovered a video surveillance system situated to monitor the curtilage outside the house, a “peanut brittle” like substance which smelled like methamphetamine, and objects used in the sale of drugs, including scales and mailing envelopes. Detective Wynn also participated in the search. He observed that the vents to the crawlspace in the basement were sealed shut and discovered several empty chemical bottles with the odor of methamphetamine. Wynn also noticed a camera and camera bag but found no suspected illegal substances. Another detective present during the search, Captain Wheeler, detected the odor of methamphetamine upon entering the house, saw empty muriatic acid bottles, and performed tests of the substance found on the scene. That substance tested positive for methamphetamine. The federal authorities retained the items seized and Query was arrested.

Captain Wheeler learned from a narcotics investigator in Atlanta that a woman named Melissa O’Connor would be visiting Query at the jail; that she would be driving Query’s black and white Camaro; and that after leaving the jail, she would go to a bank to make a deposit in Query’s account. Wheeler asked officers at the jail to notify him if O’Connor visited Query. On May 23, 1989, O’Connor visited Query, driving his black and white Camaro. Wheeler was notified, and after her visit, officers followed her to a bank where she was stopped and searched. The search produced $500 in cash, a deposit slip for Query’s account and 480 grams of methamphetamine in the camera bag Detective Wynn had seen in Query’s bedroom. During the impound search of the vehicle, more methamphetamine was recovered. A briefcase taken from the car contained a tag receipt for Query’s Nissan 300 ZX, a letter from O’Connor to Query, a deposit receipt for funds deposited in Query’s account; and a note which read: “A Courier, Davis Higgins 955-3278, get house cleaned, $6000 cash for Jake and caution Florida.”

Douglas County officers conducted their own search of Query’s home pursuant to a search warrant and discovered a methamphetamine lab hidden in the attic stocked with items used in the manufacture of methamphetamine, including various chemicals, a microwave oven, burners, laboratory glassware and a coffee pot. Three of Query’s fingerprints were discovered on a glass funnel from the lab. Officers also searched a storage bin in a mini-warehouse rented by Query where they found chemicals, laboratory glassware and other equipment used to produce methamphetamine. Approximately 875 grams of methamphetamine were seized by Douglas County officers.

Invoices from Query’s auto repair business, the “Car Doctor,” indicated Query billed O’Connor, referred to as his wife, and another woman, identified as his “soul mate,” numerous times for car repairs. *63 Other invoices showed Query performed repeated repairs after the date he went to jail. Captain Wheeler expressed his opinion as a narcotics investigator that this practice of billing was consistent with money laundering.

The court admitted evidence regarding Query’s 1983 federal conviction of distribution of methamphetamine as well as evidence of his guilty pleas to distribution of methamphetamine in connection with the federal case based on the May 3, 1989 seizure at his residence.

1. In his first enumeration of error, Query contends the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions because there was no evidence that he possessed methamphetamine and the State failed to prove a crime occurred within the statute of limitation. We disagree.

The indictment charged that Query was engaged in the possession and manufacture of methamphetamine between January 1, 1988 and May 23, 1989. Query’s trial commenced on December 11, 1989, and ended on December 14, 1989. There was ample evidence that Query committed both offenses of which he was convicted within the statute of limitation (OCGA §§ 16-13-31 (e) (3); 17-3-1 (c)), the evidence was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to find Query guilty of both offenses beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Allen v. State, 208 Ga. App. 854 (1) (432 SE2d 600) (1993).

2. Query contends his character was impermissibly placed in issue by Captain Wheeler’s testimony that he had arrested co-defendant, David Higgins, “twice for methamphetamine.” Any error in the admission of this testimony was harmless error as Query subsequently elicited like testimony from the witness. See Osborne v. State, 193 Ga. App. 276 (6) (387 SE2d 383) (1989).

3. Query contends his character was also impermissibly placed in issue by testimony which linked him with a drug dealer. The record shows that Captain Wheeler discovered Clarence Jenkins’ fishing license in Query’s warehouse bin. Query objected to Wheeler’s testimony that he had arrested Jenkins twice that year for solicitation of methamphetamine and possession of methamphetamine. Although the fishing license was proper res gestae evidence and the State was attempting to prove that Query was a part of a methamphetamine manufacturing enterprise, there was no evidence that Jenkins was a part of the organization. However, “[a]pplying the high probability test for harmless error, [cit.], to the entire circumstances before us, we find that assuming error did occur, it was harmless. There exists a ‘high probability’ that this alleged error did not contribute to the jury’s verdict of guilty as to any of the counts of which appellant was convicted.” Lance v. State, 191 Ga. App. 701, 704 (4) (382 SE2d 726) (1989). This is particularly true in light of the fact that the fishing license was discovered in Query’s storage bin among items used in the *64 production of methamphetamine.

4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

James Query v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2014
Davenport v. State
706 S.E.2d 757 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2011)
Williams v. State
543 S.E.2d 402 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2000)
Wells v. State
514 S.E.2d 245 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1999)
Pettus v. State
514 S.E.2d 901 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1999)
Reynolds v. State
508 S.E.2d 674 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1998)
In the Interest of D. A. D.
481 S.E.2d 262 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)
Rice v. State
481 S.E.2d 839 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)
Sterling v. State
478 S.E.2d 145 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)
Durant v. State
476 S.E.2d 641 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)
Bowman v. State
476 S.E.2d 608 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
456 S.E.2d 704, 217 Ga. App. 61, 95 Fulton County D. Rep. 1461, 1995 Ga. App. LEXIS 340, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/query-v-state-gactapp-1995.