Affirmed and Opinion Filed October 29, 2014 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-01486-CR 

No. 05-13-01487-CR 

KENNETH RAY TURNER, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause Nos. F13-51238-H & F13-51239-H 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Bridges, Francis, and Myers 

Opinion by Justice Bridges 

Kenneth Ray Turner appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine with the intent to 

deliver in cause number 05-13-01486-CR and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon in 

cause number 05-13-1487-CR. A jury convicted Turner, and the trial court sentenced him to 

thirty-five years’ imprisonment for the possession of cocaine with intent to deliver and ten years’ 

imprisonment for the unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon, to run concurrently. In two 

points of error, Turner challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support both of the trial 

court’s judgments. We affirm the trial court’s judgments. Because all dispositive issues are 

settled in law, we issue this memorandum opinion. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(a), 47.4. 

 On the morning of January 9, 2013, complainant, Maytrice Smith, called the Dallas 

Police Department regarding a domestic disturbance with a weapon. Dallas police officers 
 –2– 

Robert Wilkerson and Stephen Cole responded and arrived at Smith’s apartment around 5:50 

a.m. When the officers knocked on the apartment door, Smith answered the door upset, and 

whispered that Turner was sitting on the commode, he had hit her the night before, and he had a 

loaded gun on the dresser in the bedroom. Both officers could see Turner in the bathroom 

because the bathroom door was ajar. The officers entered the apartment and Cole secured the 

weapon, a 9 mm Glock handgun loaded with hollow point bullets, from the bedroom. Wilkerson 

approached Turner while Cole interviewed Smith. 

Smith told Cole that she and Turner both lived at the apartment together, they had argued 

the night before, Turner physically assaulted her, and when she tried to call for help, Turner took 

the phone away and would not allow her to call the police. Eventually, Smith and Turner both 

fell asleep, and when Smith awoke at 5:00 a.m., she called the police. While being interviewed 

by Cole, Smith told Cole that Turner had “dope” in the bedroom on the dresser. 

Wilkerson made contact with Turner while he was in the bathroom. Assuming he was 

going to arrest Turner to prevent further family violence, Wilkerson escorted Turner into the 

bedroom so that Turner could get dressed. Upon entering the bedroom, Wilkerson observed a 

brown paper lunch bag, full of what he believed to be marijuana and crack, sitting on the dresser. 

Wilkerson reported that when asked, Turner retrieved his identification from a jacket on the 

bedroom floor. Wilkerson allowed Turner to dress before hand-cuffing him. Wilkerson then 

picked up the jacket from the floor and noticed it felt heavy. Before handing the jacket to Turner, 

Wilkerson examined the jacket for contraband and found another loaded handgun in the same 

pocket where Turner had earlier retrieved his identification; this one a Smith & Wesson .40 

caliber pistol with a 13-round clip. Wilkerson placed Tuner under arrest, escorted Turner outside, 

and secured him in the patrol car. 
 –3– 

After Turner was escorted outside, Smith told Cole there were more drugs in the 

bedroom, and said she did not want any of “his drugs” to remain in the apartment. She told Cole, 

“He’s cooking the drugs all the time.” She went into the bedroom and showed Cole where to find 

a black box that contained marijuana, crack cocaine, and other paraphernalia. Smith told Cole, “I 

don’t want none of this in here. Take all that.” Smith also directed Cole to a substantial amount 

of cash. 

The State introduced evidence of Turner’s prior convictions. Turner was convicted: 1) on 

July 6, 2004 for unlawful possession of cocaine with intent to deliver and received five years’ 

imprisonment; 2) on July 6, 2004, for unlawful possession of PCP and received five years’ 

imprisonment; 3) on October 29, 2004, for unlawful possession of codeine and received five 

years’ imprisonment; 4) on September 18, 2008, for unlawful possession of MDMA 3, 4-

methylenedioxy methamphetamine with intent to deliver and received ten years’ imprisonment; 

5) on September 18, 2008, for unlawful possession of 400 grams of cocaine with intent to deliver 

and received ten years’ imprisonment; and finally 6) on September 18, 2008, for unlawful 

possession of a firearm by a felon and received four years’ imprisonment. Turner testified he was 

released from prison in February 2011. 

At trial, Marcella St. John, an undercover narcotics officer with the Dallas Police 

Department clandestine lab squad, testified concerning the packaging and sale of marijuana and 

crack cocaine. St. John testified cocaine is cooked into a solid “cookie” of crack and then further 

broken down into smaller sizes to be distributed. St. John testified “your street-level user” would 

not be in possession of a “cookie” because they are addicts and “they smoke it as soon as they 

get it.” She further explained that finding a “cookie” indicates the person is a dealer. St. John 

testified the different colored baggies were used to indicate the amount of crack in each bag – 

“It’s happening so fast . . . they don’t want to have to think about it . . . .” St. John reviewed the 
 –4– 

evidence found in the apartment—a scale, marijuana in various sized bags, various colored 

baggies, rocks of crack in various sizes, a bigger “cookie” of crack, the loaded handguns, the 

box—and stated, “it’s my opinion, based on everything that I have in front of me, it’s definitely 

the tools of the trade of somebody that’s distributing.” 

Turner was charged with possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, use of a deadly 

weapon, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. A jury convicted Turner on the 

possession of cocaine with intent to deliver and the unlawful possession of a firearm; these 

appeals followed. 

In both points of error, Turner argues the evidence is insufficient to support his 

convictions for possession of cocaine with the intent to deliver and unlawful possession of a 

firearm by a felon. When reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we examine 

all the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and determine whether a rational trier 

of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); Lucio v. State, 351 S.W.3d 878, 894 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2011). It is the responsibility of the jury to fairly resolve conflicts in the testimony, to 

weigh the evidence, and to draw reasonable inferences from basic facts to ultimate facts. 

Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319. We may not substitute our judgment for that of the fact finder 

regarding the credibility of the evidence. Dewberry v. State, 4 S.W.3d 735, 740 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1999). The fact finder may choose to believe or disbelieve all or any part of any witness’ 

testimony. Taylor v. State, 106 S.W.3d 827, 830 (Tex. App.—Dallas, 2003, no pet.). 

Turner’s first point of error argues the evidence is legally insufficient to prove his guilt 

beyond a reasonable doubt. Specifically, Turner complains the evidence fails to establish enough 

affirmative links to connect him with the cocaine found at the apartment. 
 –5– 

To prove the unlawful-possession-of-a-controlled-substance element of the charged 

offense in this case, the State was required to prove that: 1) Turner exercised control, 

management, or care over the four grams or more of cocaine; and 2) Turner knew that the matter 

possessed was cocaine. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.112(d) (West 2010); 

Blackman v. State, 350 S.W.3d 588, 594 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011). Because Turner was not in 

exclusive control of the apartment, the State was also required to prove beyond a reasonable 

doubt that Turner’s connection to the cocaine “was more than just fortuitous.” Id. The number of 

factors linking Turner to the contraband is less important than the logical force with which all the 

evidence, both direct and circumstantial, connects Turner to the contraband. Manivanh v. State, 

334 S.W.3d 23, 27 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, pet. ref’d). Possible affirmative links include: (1) 

the defendant’s presence when a search is conducted; (2) whether the contraband was in plain 

view; (3) the defendant's proximity to and the accessibility of the narcotic; (4) whether the 

defendant was under the influence of narcotics when arrested; (5) whether the defendant 

possessed other contraband or narcotics when arrested; (6) whether the defendant made 

incriminating statements when arrested; (7) whether the defendant attempted to flee; (8) whether 

the defendant made furtive gestures; (9) whether there was an odor of contraband; (10) whether 

other contraband or drug paraphernalia were present; (11) whether the defendant owned or had 

the right to possess the place where the drugs were found; (12) whether the place where the 

drugs were found was enclosed; (13) whether the defendant was found with a large amount of 

cash; and (14) whether the conduct of the defendant indicated a consciousness of guilt. Id. 

Turner argues the evidence fails to establish any affirmative links between him and the 

cocaine. We disagree. Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence reveals 

facts and circumstances which link Turner to the offense. Regarding Turner’s right to possess the 

place where the drugs were found, although the apartment lease was not in Turner’s name, Smith 
 –6– 

reported she and Turner had been in a relationship “off and on” for over nine years and Turner’s 

son was asleep on the couch. As for proximity, the apartment was very small and the bag with 

the marijuana and cocaine was in plain view and on the dresser beside the loaded weapon that 

Smith reported Turner used to threaten her. Both officers reported that Smith told them the 

drugs belonged to Turner and she wanted all of his drugs out of the apartment. Further, after 

Turner was handcuffed and taken out of the apartment, Smith voluntarily directed the officer to 

the hidden black box containing more drugs, paraphernalia, and a substantial amount of cash 

belonging to Turner. We conclude that these facts and circumstances sufficiently link Turner to 

the cocaine. See Manivanh, 334 S.W.3d at 27. Consequently, any rational trier of fact could have 

found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson, 443 U.S. at 

319. We overrule Turner’s first point of error. 

In his second point of error, Turner argues the evidence fails to establish the offense of 

unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. Specifically, Turner argues there is no evidence 

affirmatively linking Turner to the firearms. The jury was charged, and found the evidence 

proved beyond a reasonable doubt, that Turner was a convicted felon and he intentionally or 

knowingly possessed a firearm after conviction and before the fifth anniversary of his release 

from confinement or parole following conviction of the felony. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 

46.04 (West 2011). In cases involving unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon, we analyze 

the sufficiency of the evidence under the rules adopted for determining the sufficiency of the 

evidence in unlawful possession of a controlled substance cases. See Young v. State, 752 S.W.2d 

137, 140 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1988, pet. ref’d). 

Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence reveals facts and 

circumstances which link Turner to the firearms found in the apartment. The initial call to the 

Dallas Police Department was a request for assistance by Smith claiming Turner had physically 
 –7– 

assaulted her and had a loaded weapon. The first handgun was found on the bedroom dresser, in 

plain view, next to a bag of contraband, exactly where Smith told the officers the gun was 

located. The second weapon was found in the same jacket pocket that Turner used to retrieve his 

identification when asked by the officer. We conclude that these facts and circumstances 

sufficiently link Turner to the firearms. See Young, 752 S.W.2d at 140. It is undisputed that 

Turner has multiple prior felony convictions within the temporal proximity to January 8, 2013. 

Consequently, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime 

beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319. We overrule Turner’s second point of 

error. 

We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 

DO NOT PUBLISH

TEX. R. APP. P. 47. 

131486F.U05 

 

/David L. Bridges/ 

DAVID L. BRIDGES 

JUSTICE 
 –8– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

KENNETH RAY TURNER, Appellant 

No. 05-13-01486-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 

No. 1, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F13-51238-H. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. 

Justices Francis and Myers participating. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. 

Judgment entered October 29, 2014. 

 
 –9– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

KENNETH RAY TURNER, Appellant 

No. 05-13-01487-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 

No. 1, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F13-51239-H. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. 

Justices Francis and Myers participating. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. 

Judgment entered October 29, 2014.