1 ... SeeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 4.
2 ... SeeT e x . P e n a l C o d e A n n . § 4 6 .0 4 (a ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ).
3 ... SeeTex. H ea l t h &Saf et y Code Ann. §§ 4 8 1 . 102 , 481. 112 ( d) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ). 

## COURT OFAPPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2 - 07 - 32 9- CR NO. 2 - 07 - 33 0- CR
P E T E RVI L L AR R E AL AP P E L L ANT V . THE STATE OF TE XA S STATE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 2 97TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### MEMORANDU M OPI NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A j u ry c o n v i c ted A p p e l l a n t P e ter V i l l a rr e a l o f un l a w fu l p o ss e ss i o n o f a f i r ea r m by a f el on 2a n d p o s s e s s i o n o ff o u rg r a mso rmo r eb u tl e s s t h a n t wo h u n d re d g ra m so f m e th a m p h e ta m i n ea n d c o c a i n ew i th in te n t to d e l i v e r. 3 T h e2

j ury asses sed hi s puni shm entatt w ent y year s’ co nf i nem enti n t he f i r ear m case a n d f o rt yy e a r s ’ c o n f in e m e n ti n t h ed r u g c a s e . T h et r ia l c o u rts e n t e n c e d h im
a c c o r d in g lya n d o r d e r e d t h a tt h es e n t e n c e sb es e rv e d c o n c u r r e n t ly . In h iss o le poi nt , A ppel l antch al l enges t he f act ual suf f i ci ency of t he evi dence i n each case. B e c a u s e w e h o l d th a t th e e v i d e n c e i s fa c tu a l l y s u fficie n t to s u p p o rt th ej u ry ’s
ver di ct s, w e af f i r m t he t r i al court ’ s j udg m ent s. O n Decem ber2, 2005 , O f f i ce rTuck ers aw A ppe l l ant , w ho w asdr i vi ng a bl ac k For d M us t ang , r un a r ed l i ght i n w hat t es t i m ony des cr i bed as a hi gh
cr i m e ar ea. O f f i cerTu ckerpul l ed A ppel l an t’ s c a r over , di scover ed an
o u ts ta n d i n g w a rra n t fo r h i sa rre s t, a n d a s k e d d i s p a tc h to s e n d a n a s s i s t o ffice r. O ffice r T u c k e r p l a c e d A p p e l l a n t u n d e r a rre s t a n d a s k e d A p p e l l a n t’s p a s s e n g e rt o s t e p o u t o ft h e c a r . W h e n O f f ic e rC o xa r r iv e d , A p p e lla n tw a sin t he backs e a t of O f f i c e r Tu c k e r ’ s pa t r ol c a r . O f f i c e r Tu c k e r pe r f or m e d an i nve nt ory s ea r ch ofA ppe l l ant ’ s ca r and f ound a D al l as C ow boy’ s t obogg an or sk ica p be t w ee n t he d r i ver ’ s se atan d t he ce nt erco ns ol e. I ns i de t he ca p, O f f i ce rTuck erf ound m et ham phe t am i ne and co ca i ne, i ndi vi dual l y pa ck age d. O f f i ce rT uck ercont i nue d t o sea r ch t he ca rand f ound $64 4 i n c as h, an d, i n t he tru n k , a R u g e r p i s to l . T h e h a m m e r w a sc o c k e d a n d re a d yto fi re . T h e rew e re t en l i ve r oundsofam m uni t i on i n t he gun.4 ... Poi ndexter v. Sta te , 1 53 S. W . 3d 402, 405– 06 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 2 0 0 5 ) (c i ta ti o n so m i tte d ).

5 ... Ba tesv. S tate , 155 S. W . 3d 212, 216– 17 ( Te x. App . — Dal l a s2004 , n o p e t.). 3 A ppel l antco nt ends t hatt he evi dence i s f act ual l y i nsuf f i ci entt o est abl i sh t hatheex er ci se d t he r equ i si t e l eve l ofca r e, cust ody, an d c ont r ol ove rt he dr ugs and t he gun t o pr ovet ha th e kno w i ngl y po ss es se d t hem . He doe s not ot her w i se chal l enge t he evi dence. A ppel l antr el i es on t he evi dence t hathe had
r ec ent l y pu r cha se d t he veh i cl e and t hathew asnoti n e xcl us i ve pos se ss i on of
e it h e r th e d ru g s o r th e g u n a s w e l l a s th e a b s e n c e o f e v i d e n c e o fh is f i nger pr i nt s on t he gun and t he bagg i es ofdr ugs. H e al so posi t s t hatt he cash
co u l d h ave r easonabl y been t he pr oceeds ofhi s paycheck, si nce t he ar r est
occ ur r ed on a Fr i dayaft er noon. A s t he Texa s C ourtofCr i m i nalA ppe al s hashe l d, T o p rov e u n l a w fu l p o ss e ss i o n o f a c o n tr o l l e d su b sta n c e , th eS tate m u st p rov e tha t: ( 1 ) th e ac c u se d e x e rci se d c o n tr o l , m a n a g e m e n t, orcar e overt he s u b stance; and ( 2) t he accused knew t he m att er pos se ss ed w asco nt r aba nd. W het hert hi s evi den ce i s di r ec tor ci r cum st ant i al , “i t m us t es t abl i sh , t o t he r equ i si t e l ev el of c o n fi d e n c e , th a t th e a c c u s e d ’sc o n n e c ti o n w i th th ed ru g w a sm o re t han j us tf ort ui t ous . Thi s i s t he w hol e o ft he so - ca l l ed ‘ af f i r m at i ve l i n k s ’ ru l e .” 4 Th e af f i r m at i ve l i nks doct r i ne al so appl i es t o t he possessi on of f i r ear m s. 56 ... Poi ndexter, 1 5 3 S .W .3 d a t 4 0 6 ; se e a l so Na q uinv. S tate , 607 S .W .2 d 5 8 3 , 5 8 6 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 8 0 ). 4 Furt her , as t he S t at e p oi nt s ou t , i n pr ovi ng possessi on, w hen t he accused i s noti n e xcl us i ve pos se ss i on o fthe l oca t i on w her e t he con t r aba nd i s f ound, t he S t at e m ustest abl i sh “addi t i onal i ndep enden t f act s and ci r cum st ances” t hat “l i nk” t he accused i n such a m annert hati tcan be concl uded t hatt he accused had kn ow l edg e oft he cont r aba nd a nd e xer ci se d c ont r ol ove rt he con t r aba nd. 6 A ppe l l antpoi nt s t o t w o c i r cum st anc est o s ugge stt hathem ay notha ve had k no w l e dg e o ft hep r e s e nc eo fe i t he rt hed r ug so rt hef i r e a r m : h eh ad
r ecent l y pur chased t he carand t her e w as a passenger . The r ecor d r ef l ect s t hat A p p e l l a n t t o l d O ffi c e r C o xtha t he h a d rec e n tl yp u rch a se d the c a r, a n d th eS tate i nt r o d u c e d a c e rt i f i e d c o p yo ft h ev e h i c l er e g i s t r a t i o n s h o w i n g t h a tAp p e l l a nt
w ast he ow neroft he ca r . Addi t i ona l l y, A ppe l l antw asdr i vi ng t he ca r , an d t he p a s s e n g e rw a sa f o u rt e e n -y e a r -o ld g ir l. Th e dr ugs w er e packaged f or sal e and conceal ed i n a t obo ggan orskicap l oca t ed bet w ee n t he ce nt erco ns ol e a nd t he dr i ver ’ s se at . The gu n w asi n t he t r unk, co ck ed, l oad ed w i t h t en r ounds , an d r ea dy t o f i r e; t her e w asno s u g g e s ti o n th a t i t w a s h i d d e n . A d d i ti o n a l l y , $ 6 4 4 i n c a s h w a sfo u n d i n th e c a r. Th e evi dence show s t hatt he skicap w as cl ear l y vi si bl e to t he of f i cer s, w hi ch i s s o m e ev i d e n c e tha t i t w a s v i sibl eto A p p e l l a n t.5

The e vi den cet ha tA ppel l anti nt ent i ona l l y orkn ow i ngl y po ss es se d t he dr ugsi ncl ude s t he evi den cet hatA ppe l l antow ned t he ca r , hew asdr i vi ng t he
car , t he cap contai ni ng t he dr ugs w as bet w een t he dr i ver ’ s seatand t he cent er consol e and w a s cl ear l y vi si bl e, t he cap w as i n an ar ea oft he caroverw hi ch A ppe l l antha d i m m edi at e c ont r ol ast he dr i ver , t he m et ham phe t am i ne and
coc ai ne w er e i ndi vi dua l l y pac ka ged i ns i de t he ca p, an d $644 i n c as h w asf ound i n t he ca r . Ther e i s no evi den cet hatanyoneel sehad had r ec entpos se ss i on of th e c a r. C o m m a n d e r H e r s c h e l T e b a y o f t h e T a r r a n tC o u n t yO r g a n iz e d C r im eU n it tes ti fi e d tha t d rug d e a l e rs o ften ca rryp i sto l s a n d w i l l ca rrysi g n i fi c a n t am o u n ts ofcash i ft hey have sol d dr ugs r ecent l y. H e t est i f i ed th a t i tw as notunusual f ora dr ug de al ert o ha ve a f i r ea r m i n t he t r unk . Gi ven t he am ountofca sh an d t h e in d iv id u a l p a c k a g in g o ft h em e t h a m p h e t a m in ea n d c o c a in e , t h eju ryc o u ld have l ogi cal l y concl uded t hatA ppel l antw as deal i ng dr ugs and t hat , as Tebay t est i f i ed, i tw oul d not be unu sual f orhi m t o have a f i r ear m i n t he t r unk. A ppe l l antpoi nt s t o t he abs enc e of evi den ceofhi s f i nge r pr i nt s on t he gun a n d d ru g s . A g a i n , th e e v i d e n c es h o w sth a t th ed ru g s , p a c k a g e d f o r s a l e , w e re i n a ski cap near t he dr i ver , A ppel l ant , t her e w as no i ndi cat i on t hatt he gun w as hi dden , and i tw as cocked, l oaded , and r eady t o f i r e. Ther e i s no evi dence t hat
a n y o n e e l s e h a d re c e n tl yd ri v e n t h ec a r, a n d th e rei se v i d e n c eth a t d ru g d e a l e rs7 ... S e eNea l v. S tate , 2 5 6 S .W .3 d 2 6 4 , 2 7 5 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 8 ); W a tso nv. S tate , 2 0 4S .W .3 d 4 0 4 , 4 1 4(T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 6 ). 6 o ft e n c a r rya f i r e a r m. V i ew i ng al l t he evi den cepr es ent ed t o t he j ury i n a ne ut r all i ght , f avo r i ng nei t herpa rt y, 7 w e hol d t hat t he evi den cei s f ac t ual l y s uf f i ci entt o s upportt he
ver di ct s. W e t her ef or e over r ul e A ppel l an t’ s so l e p oi ntand af f i r m t he t r i al
court ’ s j udg m ent s.

L E E AN N D AUP HI NOT J U S T I C E
PA N EL: DA U PH I N O T, G A RD N ER, an d W A LKER, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: M a r c h 12, 2009