# Allen v. State

> Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · March 25, 2008 · 249 S.W.3d 680

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9632514

## Case

- **Full name:** Chandell ALLEN, Appellant, v. the STATE of Texas, Appellee
- **Court:** Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
- **Decided:** March 25, 2008
- **Citations:** 249 S.W.3d 680; 2008 WL 615431
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Pemberton
- **Judges:** Law, Pemberton, Onion
- **Cited by:** 146 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9632514

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that officer’s testimony that he was able to locate cocaine on top of a refrigerator did not prove that the cocaine was in plain view of appellant, given that she was only seen in the living room and she was seven inches shorter than the officer
- stating that when contraband is found hidden or secreted, the State must address whether the accused knew of the existence of the secreted place and its contents and that knowledge that others in the place have committed an offense does not show possession
- holding cocaine on platter on top back of refrigerator was not in plain view of appellant who was on a couch in another room when officer entered apartment despite evidence that officer was taller than appellant and could have seen it
- noting that “[t]he question is whether the amount of cocaine discovered should be factored into the determination of any link between appellant and the cocaine under the circumstances,” and concluding that “the factor of a large quantity of contraband [was] of little or no val…
- explaining that presence or absence of factors “aid appellate courts in determining the legal sufficiency of the evidence in knowing possession of contraband cases”

## Opinion text

DISSENTING OPINION
BOB PEMBERTON, Justice.
With all respect to the majority’s thorough analysis of each “link” between Allen and the contraband, I would hold that the combined and cumulative force of all of the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, is legally sufficient to support Allen’s conviction. See Evans v. State, 202 S.W.3d 158, 164 (Tex.Crim. App.2006). When viewing the evidence in a neutral light, I would also hold that the evidence is factually sufficient. Accordingly, I would affirm the judgment of the district court.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9632514. Public record. Not legal advice.