Case Title: McDonald v. State

Citation: 454 So. 2d 488

Docket Number: 54903

State: mississippi

Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

Date: 1984-07-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
454 So. 2d 488 (1984) Terry Wayne McDONALD v. STATE of Mississippi. No. 54903. Supreme Court of Mississippi. July 25, 1984. Richard Hamilton, Fielding L. Wright, Wright & Hamilton, Pascagoula, for appellant. Bill Allain, Atty. Gen., by Walter L. Turner, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee. Before PATTERSON, C.J., and HAWKINS and PRATHER, JJ. HAWKINS, Justice, for the Court: Terry Wayne McDonald appeals from his conviction of conspiracy to possess and distribute marijuana and sentence of five years and $5,000.00 fine. He was one of seven indicted for this crime. Numerous errors are assigned on his appeal, but we address only one. Because we are convinced the State never made a jury issue on McDonald's being a co-conspirator, we reverse and render. On Friday, November 21, 1980, Terry Wayne McDonald was 26 years old, married, the father of two children, and a deputy sheriff investigator with the sheriff's office of Jackson County. (He had worked for 2 1/2 years with that department, beginning *489 as a jailer.) He had received an honorable discharge from the United States Army, after serving in the Green Berets. He had no sisters, and only one brother, Mack McDonald. Because there are two McDonalds, we will refer to each by his first name. Mack got Terry into one pack of trouble. This case involves several individuals dealing in a large quantity of marijuana, and we will begin as the matter was related by the state's star witness at trial: Dan Westphal. Westphal and four others learned of a shrimp boat of marijuana off the coast, and the five of them agreed to unload the marijuana, sell it and share equally in the proceeds. The other four in this agreement were: Kenneth and Graylon Hester, Tom Gruen and Roy Paine. Two to three days before the arrival of the marijuana off the coast, Westphal contacted Mack about locating a place to store the marijuana. There was no set amount Mack was to be paid. According to Westphal, "It could be part of the loot, part of the marijuana in payment. It wasn't important to either one of us to settle on a straight amount." Westphal, the Hesters and Paine made the trip out in a shrimp boat called "Rendezvous", to the West end of Petit Bois Island, and removed about one-half the marijuana cargo from the other boat, loading it onto the Rendezvous. They docked at a local boat repair yard, and unloaded about one-half of the marijuana from the Rendezvous. Gruen was on shore. They had a load of over two tons. The marijuana taken off the boat was loaded into a white Chevrolet closed van truck. Westphal, Gruen and Graylon Hester went in the truck to meet Mack, who then escorted them to the residence of Tom Hinton in Jackson County. All of the group wound up at Hinton's residence, where the marijuana was unloaded into his hothouse. Hinton's involvement in the matter began with a telephone call he received on Friday morning, November 21. It was Mack. Hinton testified: Hinton permitted the party to unload the marijuana into his hothouse, but after their departure both he and his wife were quite uncomfortable. He telephoned Mack and told him the marijuana would have to be moved. Hinton and the McDonalds had been lifelong friends, in public school together. The McDonalds also knew another individual from school days, Ray Stewart, but Terry was not on such good terms with him, having once arrested Stewart for auto theft. Over in the late afternoon, about dark, of the day the marijuana was placed in Hinton's hothouse, Mack telephoned his brother Terry to come over to his house, and from his voice Terry detected some urgency. As Terry drove into Mack's driveway, Ray Stewart drove in front of the house on the highway. Terry was inquiring the reason Mack wanted him, and was told there was no time, that it was getting dark, and to get into his truck and follow him to Hinton's house. Thereupon, the three of them, each driving his own pickup, drove to Hinton's house. Terry testified: Mack told Terry that was what Stewart was for, and Stewart responded he wanted it. Terry helped Stewart and Mack haul the marijuana from Hinton's house over to a shop behind Stewart's house. Stewart lived about four miles from the Hintons, and each pickup truck made two trips with marijuana, taking about 45 minutes altogether. Asked what he thought when he saw the marijuana, Terry responded: Asked why he had not arrested them then, Terry responded: Stewart was promised $2,500 by Mack to store the marijuana. Stewart never received any money. Mack never received any money, and Hinton never received any money. Other than what has been related, Terry had nothing to do with the marijuana. He did not know Westphal, either of the Hesters, Gruen or Paine. Westphal and the others later removed the marijuana from Stewart's shop over a period of time and sold it off in lots. Westphal made over $45,000. Some of the marijuana went to Alabama. Westphal was arrested February 19, 1981, with a large quantity of marijuana and $10,000 to $11,000 cash. The only persons involved in the marijuana who testified were Westphal, Hinton, Stewart and Terry. There was no dispute in any of the testimony, except Stewart testified that Mack offered him $2,500 to store the marijuana, that they were at Mack's house at the time, and Terry was present. Terry vehemently disputed this, and Terry's version is borne out by Hinton, who was a state witness, and who said Terry was upset and angry with them over getting involved at all. Terry's total involvement was the 45 minutes it took for him to make two trips with marijuana in his pickup from Hinton's house to Stewart's on the night of November 21, 1980. Terry had no dealings at any time with Westphal, the Hesters, Gruen or Paine. He knew nothing about them. *491 Following Westphal's arrest, there was an investigation, and Terry was asked about a large quantity of marijuana in the north end of the county. He said he had been informed by a confidential informant that it had belonged to a man named Dan Westphal in Gautier. He had concluded that the marijuana was Westphal's. On October 12, 1982, Gruen, the Hesters, Hinton, one Larry Holmes, Terry and Mack were indicted by the Jackson County Grand Jury charging that between November 1, 1980, and December 31, 1981, they did: Westphal had been indicted for another offense, and although he was obviously the ring leader and main beneficiary, for his testimony the State agreed not to indict him, and granted him immunity for his part in this crime. Stewart was never indicted. Paine was never indicted. All of the individuals indicted with the exception of Terry pleaded guilty. The circuit judge overruled a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal at the conclusion of the State's case. Numerous errors have been assigned on this appeal. We only address the question of whether there was a jury issue made that Terry engaged in a conspiracy under Miss. Code Ann. § 97-1-1 (1972). The State chose not to charge him with being an accessory after the fact, or with possession of marijuana. We are thus faced with the narrow question of whether from this record there was proof from which any jury could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that Terry was a "conspirator" under the statute. Miss. Code Ann. § 97-1-1 (1972) provides: Long ago, in Ellzey v. State, 57 Miss. 827 (1880), we did state: "A conspiracy is defined to be a confederacy of two or more persons to accomplish some unlawful purpose." In Moore v. State, 290 So. 2d 603 (Miss. 1974), we stated: "By its very nature conspiracy is a joint or group offense requiring a concert of free will." At p. 604. We find no decisions from this Court of any benefit on the specific question of whether the facts of this case made Terry a co-conspirator. Indeed, this Court has had but few occasions to deal with criminal conspiracy. In most crimes the conspirators and perpetrators were simply charged as principals in the criminal offense; Miss. Code Ann. 97-1-3 (1972). The United States Courts, on the other hand, have dealt with a plethora of criminal conspiracies, and there we find ample authority. In United States v. Peoni, 100 F.2d 401 (2nd Cir.1938), Peoni had passed some *492 counterfeit bills. He was charged with possession of counterfeit money and conspiracy to possess. In holding Peoni was not a co-conspirator, the Court stated, page 403: In United States v. Falcone, 109 F.2d 579 (2nd Cir.1940), affirmed 311 U.S. 205, 61 S. Ct. 204, 85 L. Ed. 128 (1940), the accused Falcone was indicted under a federal conspiracy statute along with numerous others engaged in manufacturing untaxed whiskey. Falcone was a wholesaler, selling sugar to the participants. In reversing his conviction, the Court stated: In United States v. Andolschek, 142 F.2d 503 (2nd Cir.1944), the numerous government agents were indicted in a conspiracy to take bribes. Herskowitz on appeal alleged it was not proven he had been a member of the conspiracy, although he may very well have engaged in some criminal acts. Again, the Court states as to a conspiracy: In Bollenbach v. United States, 326 U.S. 607, 66 S. Ct. 402, 90 L. Ed. 350 (1945), the accused Bollenback sold some of the securities which had been stolen. He was indicted for conspiracy to transport stolen securities. The United States Supreme Court held: To the same effect is Cleaver v. United States, 238 F.2d 766 (10th Cir.1956), where the defendant Colasacco helped dispose of *493 stolen property, the Court held this was insufficient to constitute him a co-conspirator in the crime of conspiring to commit burglary. Roberts and Bookout v. United States, 416 F.2d 1216 (5th Cir.1969), is illustrative of this case. Bookout, Roberts and Cocco were charged in three count indictments with (1) committing and aiding and abetting uttering and publishing counterfeit money, (2) passing two counterfeit bills, and (3) conspiring to pass, utter and publish counterfeit money. Bookout was the common-law wife of one Capatorto, and they lived in the same home with a Pat Miller. Capatorto, Miller, and one John Cocco and Carl Roberts all conspired to pass counterfeit money. They assembled in the home of Capatorto and Miller, and there made their arrangement. Bookout was not present at their plans, was across the hall in the bathroom, but presumably knew what was going on. The men left to pass counterfeit money at a race track. After the men left, the two women left to go shopping in Fort Lauderdale. They ate at a drug store, following which Miller told Bookout she was going to try and pass a bogus bill, and Bookout warned her against it. Bookout paid for her meal with her own good money. When Miller attempted to pass a bogus bill, the clerk summoned the police by phone. Before the police arrived, Miller gave Bookout the remaining nine bills she had, and asked her to get rid of them, her reason being she did not want Bookout to get involved. Bookout took the money and burned it. Was Bookout a co-conspirator? The Court stated, pp. 1220-1221: Conspiracy is a word of amorphous meaning, used in factual situations as broad as human behavior. We do not in this opinion attempt to define its many different *495 shades of meaning, or the outer limits of its application to criminal behavior. We merely decide whether Terry Wayne McDonald's offense ever reached any standard of proof required for such a crime. To constitute an individual a co-conspirator, there must be a recognition on his part that he is entering into some kind of common plan, and knowingly intends to further its common purpose. Terry was charged with knowingly entering into a scheme with certain persons for the purpose of possessing marijuana with the intent to distribute. Terry was trying to extricate his brother and a very good friend. He violated the law when he possessed and transported the marijuana. He may very well have been an accessory after the fact under Miss. Code Ann. § 97-1-5 (1972). For some reason which escapes us, the state chose to charge him with the crime of conspiracy. For the reasons stated, the judgment of conviction is vacated, and appellant discharged. REVERSED AND RENDERED. PATTERSON, C.J., WALKER and ROY NOBLE LEE, P.JJ., and BOWLING, DAN M. LEE, PRATHER, ROBERTSON and SULLIVAN, JJ. concur.