Chandler v. State

The rule of lenity did not apply to the defendant's conviction for selling a counterfeit substance, since the substance in question did not fall under either definition of imitation controlled substance as set forth in O.C.G.A. § 16-13-30.2 a.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

A jury found Michael Chandler guilty of selling a counterfeit substance.1 Following the denial of his motion for new trial, Chandler appeals, asserting several claims of error. Having found these claims to be without merit, we affirm. Construed in favor of the verdict, the evidence reveals that a drug task force agent received a call from a confidential informant “CI” stating that he knew someone who “could get a quantity of cocaine and was willing to sell that cocaine.” The agent spoke with someone by phone who told him that the cocaine would cost $800 per ounce. This person was later identified as Hassan Bell. The agent requested an ounce and a half of cocaine totaling $1200 and agreed to meet at a local restaurant. When the agent arrived, he observed several individuals, including Chandler, standing outside and approached them. Chandler told the agent that they “had to go somewhere to do the deal.” The agent and Chandler entered the agent’s vehicle, and Chandler told the agent that he wanted to count the money. The agent then requested the cocaine. After Chandler counted the money, he stated to Bell, who was standing outside the vehicle, that “the money was all there.” Bell then handed the agent a bag that contained a white powdery substance.2 The agent then called in other officers and arrested Chandler.

Chandler testified that he and the CI had both resided at a halfway house, and that he had allowed the CI to reside there in his space for one week. He testified further that the CI owed him $68 for the week’s stay. Chandler explained that the CI asked him for a ride to meet his brother-in-law in Riverdale, Georgia. The CI told Chandler that he had to “pick up some money.” Chandler called a friend to give the two a ride. Chandler testified that the CI told him that he had to make a “stop” first. The men stopped at an apartment building, and the CI went inside. Chandler stated that when the CI returned 20 minutes later, he was carrying a brown paper bag and told Chandler that he had to give his brother-in-law the bag to get some money.

Chandler v. State

The rule of lenity did not apply to the defendant's conviction for selling a counterfeit substance, since the substance in question did not fall under either definition of imitation controlled substance as set forth in O.C.G.A. § 16-13-30.2 a.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report