Court Opinion

ID: 9935524
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:56:11.365263+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:58.789361
License: Public Domain

I cannot agree that the State failed to prove that the petitioner attempted to "commit a controlled substance crime." I believe that the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly concluded that the evidence was sufficient to show that the petitioner was attempting to make MDMA.
An expert who did an analysis on all of the chemicals found in the petitioner's apartment determined that the petitioner was attempting to manufacture MDMA. He testified that the petitioner had only one step left to go in the process and that had he completed that step he could have made 175 to 250 tablets of MDMA. Based on that evidence, it was a jury question whether he was attempting to manufacture the controlled substance for his own personal use or for sale or distribution; consequently, I cannot agree with the majority opinion that comes to a different conclusion. I must dissent.
STEAGALL, J., concurs.