Opinion ID: 859665
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the trial court erred in failing to grant

Text: ADAMS’ REQUEST FOR A LESSER- INCLUDED OFFENSE INSTRUCTION OF POSSESSION OF COCAINE. Adams argues that the trial court erred in refusing to allow him to present a lesser included offense to the jury, namely possession of cocaine. In Griffin v. State, 533 So. 2d 444, 447 (Miss. 1988) (citations omitted), our supreme court stated: A lesser-included offense instruction should only be granted if there is an evidentiary basis therefor in the record. The test has been fleshed out in Harper v. State, 478 So. 2d 1017 (Miss. 1985): [A] lesser included offense instruction should be granted unless the trial judge--and ultimately this Court--can say, taking the evidence in the light most favorable to the accused, and considering all reasonable favorable inferences which may be drawn in favor of the accused from the evidence, that no reasonable jury could find the defendant guilty of the lesser included offense (and conversely not guilty of at least one essential element of the principal charge). Further, To have been entitled to a lesser included offense instruction, it was incumbent upon [the Appellant] to point to some evidence in the record from which a jury could, other than by mere surmise, find him not guilty of the crime with which he was charged and at the same time find him guilty of a lesser included offense. Toliver v. State, 600 So. 2d 186, 192 (Miss. 1992). There was no evidentiary basis to support a lesser-included instruction, and the trial court was correct in denying it. Adams testified repeatedly that he never had the cocaine in his possession; however, he did testify that he was involved in getting the buyer and seller together. He even admitted taking money from Gates for finding the seller. If the jury had chosen to believe Adams’ testimony and disregard the testimony presented by the State, then it could not have found that Adams was guilty of the lesser offense of possession while at the same time finding that he was not guilty of the offense of transfer. Even if the jury chose to believe Adams’ testimony, the jury could only have found that he was an accessory before the fact, and therefore, a principle to the sale of cocaine. We find that this issue has no merit. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CHOCTAW COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT OF CONVICTION OF SALE OF COCAINE WITHIN 1500 FEET OF A SCHOOL BUILDING AND SENTENCE TO FORTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND FINE OF $1,000.00 IS AFFIRMED. SENTENCE IMPOSED IN THIS CAUSE SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY TO SENTENCE IMPOSED IN CAUSE NO. 2087 AND CONSECUTIVELY TO ANY SENTENCE PREVIOUSLY IMPOSED. ALL COSTS ARE ASSESSED TO CHOCTAW COUNTY. FRAISER, C.J., BRIDGES, P.J., BARBER, COLEMAN, DIAZ, KING, McMILLIN, PAYNE, AND SOUTHWICK, JJ., CONCUR.