Case Title: Jones v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: cr96-976

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1997-01-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
Bobby Joe JONES v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 96-976                                          ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
               Opinion delivered January 21, 1997


1.   Appeal & error -- record on appeal confined to that which is
     abstracted -- transcript references not substitute for proper
     abstract. -- The record on appeal is confined to that which is
     abstracted and cannot be contradicted or supplemented by
     statements made in the argument portions of the briefs;
     transcript or record references in an appellant's argument are
     not a substitute for a proper abstract. 

2.   Appeal & error -- motion for directed verdict did not apprise
     trial court of specific basis for motion -- issue not properly
     abstracted. -- Where appellant's motion for a directed verdict
     did not apprise the trial court of the specific basis for the
     motion, the appellate court would not address it. 

3.   Appeal & error -- argument made for first time on appeal --
     argument not considered. -- Appellant's second argument was
     not reached because no objection was made at trial and the
     issue was not preserved for appeal; the appellate court will
     not consider arguments made for the first time on appeal.


     Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court; Philip B. Purifoy, Judge;
affirmed.
     Honey & Honey, P.A., for appellant.  
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  Sandy Moll, Asst. Att'y Gen.,
for appellee.

     Ray Thornton, Justice.
     Appellant Bobby Joe Jones was convicted of delivering a
counterfeit substance purported to be cocaine, and sentenced to a
term of forty years in the Arkansas Department of Correction.  On
appeal, he claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion
for a directed verdict and challenges the State's chain of custody
of paraffin wax, the counterfeit substance. In addition, Mr. Jones
claims the State failed to produce evidence that he represented the
paraffin wax as cocaine during the drug sell for which he was
arrested.  Neither of these arguments is preserved for our review,
and we affirm the trial court.
     On September 9, 1995, Willie Robinson, a State Police
investigator, paid Kevin Washington $125.00 to be a confidential
informant on a drug buy.  The two traveled in Washington's maroon
Cadillac from Texarkana to Lewisville, where they met Mr. Jones
walking from his mother's home.  They asked him for an "O-Z," and
he told them to meet him at his brother Donnie's house.  When they
arrived, Mr. Jones was entering the house.  When he emerged from
the house, he proceeded to the driver's window and exchanged a
plastic envelope containing three rock-like substances that looked
like crack cocaine for $1000.00 in unmarked hundred-dollar bills.
Officer Robinson stated on direct examination:
     The informant stopped him and told him we needed to buy
     an ounce of cocaine.  He told us to meet him at Donnie's
     house ....  We waited outside while Jones went in.  I
     gave the informant $1000.00 buy money.  Jones came out,
     walked to the driver's side, and handed the informant the
     substance and the informant gave Jones the money ....
     When I first saw Jones on the street, Kevin did the
     talking.  He said he wanted to purchase an "O-Z", which
     means an ounce of cocaine on the street ....
At the jury trial, the State presented the substance bought from
Mr. Jones.  The State Crime Lab chemist who analyzed the substance
testified that it was 12.48 grams of paraffin wax.   
     Mr. Jones argues that this case should be reversed because the
trial court failed to grant his motion for a directed verdict.  We
do not reach this issue regarding substantial evidence because Mr.
Jones's motion for a directed verdict did not apprise the trial
court of the specific basis upon which the motion was made.  Walker
v. State, 318 Ark. 107,