Case Name: PEOPLE v. STEVE JONES
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1993-10-04
Citations: 201 Mich. App. 687
Docket Number: Docket No. 142402
Parties: PEOPLE v STEVE JONES
Judges: Before: Fitzgerald, P.J., and Michael J. Kelly and W. J. Caprathe, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 201
Pages: 687–696

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v STEVE JONES
Docket No. 142402.
Submitted June 3, 1993, at Detroit.
Decided October 4,1993, at 9:45 a.m.
Steve Jones was convicted following a bench trial in the Recorder’s Court for the City of Detroit, James E. Roberts, J., of aiding and abetting possession with the intent to deliver less than fifty grams of cocaine. He appealed, contending that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. The evidence indicated that the defendant accepted money from a third party, to whom a codefendant then handed a package that appeared to contain narcotics. When the defendant and the codefendant were apprehended minutes later, the defendant had a large sum of money, primarily in small denominations, and the codefendant was in possession of eighteen clear plastic bags containing suspected rock cocaine. The defendant stipulated at trial that one of the bags later was determined to contain cocaine.
The Court of Appeals held:
1. The evidence was sufficient to support the inference that the defendant knew that his codefendant possessed cocaine. It was reasonable for the court to conclude that the essential elements of the crime had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial court’s findings were sufficient.
2. The court’s off-the-record comments, which were not objected to by the defendant at trial, were not shown to have been improper.
Affirmed.
W. J. Caprathe, J., dissenting in part, stated that the defendant’s conviction should be reversed because the evidence is not sufficient to support the conviction. The conclusions upon which the conviction was based are nothing more than inferences built upon other inferences that are not independently supported by established facts.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Thomas L. Casey, Solicitor General, John D. O’Hair, Prosecuting Attorney, Timothy A. Baughman, Chief of Research, Training, and Appeals, and Jeffrey Ca minsky, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
Robert M. Morgan, for the defendant on appeal.
Before: Fitzgerald, P.J., and Michael J. Kelly and W. J. Caprathe, JJ.
Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.

Opinion:
Fitzgerald, P.J.
Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of aiding and abetting possession with the intent to deliver less than fifty grams of cocaine, MCL 333.7401(2)(a)(iv); MSA 14.15(7401)(2)(a)(iv), and was sentenced to IV2 to 20 years' imprisonment. Defendant appeals as of right. We affirm.
Defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of aiding and abetting his codefendant, Melvin Metzler. Evidence was presented that a police officer saw defendant accept money from a third person, to whom Metzler then handed a package that appeared to contain narcotics. When defendant and Metzler were apprehended minutes later, defendant had a large sum of money—primarily in small denominations—and Metzler was in possession of eighteen clear plastic bags containing suspected rock cocaine. Defendant stipulated at trial that one of these bags was later determined to contain cocaine.
Defendant did not have to actually possess the cocaine to be convicted. People v Wolfe, 440 Mich 508, 519-521, 524; 489 NW2d 748 (1992); People v Sammons, 191 Mich App 351, 370-372; 478 NW2d 901 (1991). The evidence was sufficient to support the inference that defendant knew Metzler possessed cocaine. Our review of the evidence indicates that it was reasonable for the trier of fact to conclude that the essential elements of the crime had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. People v Petrella, 424 Mich 221, 268-270; 380 NW2d 11 (1985); People v Vaughn, 186 Mich App 376, 379; 465 NW2d 365 (1990).
Defendant also challenges the fact that the trial court made off-the-record comments during its findings. These comments do not mean that the trial court's findings were insufficient. MCR 6.403; see People v Legg, 197 Mich App 131, 134-135; 494 NW2d 797 (1992); People v Armstrong, 175 Mich App 181, 185; 437 NW2d 343 (1989). There was no objection made at the time and no subsequent record was made concerning the comments for our review. We will not speculate regarding what the trial court may have said. There is nothing on the record that would lead us to assume that there was anything improper in the trial court's digressions.
Affirmed.
Michael J. Kelly, J., concurred.