PEOPLE OF MI V RUFUS A SAMUEL
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
August 31, 2001
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 223449
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 98-010603
RUFUS A. SAMUEL,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Wilder, P.J., and Hood and Griffin, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Defendant appeals as of right from a jury conviction of delivery of less than fifty grams of
cocaine, MCL 333.7401(2)(a)(iv), for which he was sentenced to life probation. We affirm.
In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence in a criminal case, this Court must review the
record de novo and, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, determine
whether a rational trier of fact could find that the essential elements of the crime were proved
beyond a reasonable doubt. People v Hoffman, 225 Mich App 103, 111; 570 NW2d 146 (1997);
People v Hammons, 210 Mich App 554, 556; 534 NW2d 183 (1995). Circumstantial evidence
and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom may be sufficient to prove the elements of the crime.
People v Gould, 225 Mich App 79, 86; 570 NW2d 140 (1997). All conflicts in the evidence are
to be resolved in favor of the prosecution. People v Terry, 224 Mich App 447, 452; 569 NW2d
641 (1997).
The elements of the crime charged are that (1) the defendant delivered a controlled
substance, (2) the substance delivered was cocaine, (3) the defendant knew that the substance he
delivered was cocaine, and (4) the substance was in a mixture that weighed less than fifty grams.
CJI 2d 12.2. The term “deliver” or “delivery” is defined as “the actual, constructive, or
attempted transfer from 1 person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an
agency relationship.” MCL 333.7105(1).
The evidence showed that the police received a tip about a man selling cocaine at a
particular address. They drove to the area and saw defendant standing on the sidewalk. While
conducting surveillance, the police saw a truck drive up and stop across the street. Defendant
approached and spoke to the driver for a few seconds, went inside a house, returned after a
minute, and handed the driver a white object in exchange for cash. The truck left and the police
-1-
stopped it a few blocks away. The police saw the driver put something in the back of his truck as
he pulled over. Looking in that spot, an officer found a wad of napkins that resembled the white
object defendant had sold to the driver. Wrapped inside the napkins were seven plastic coin
envelopes that were later found to contain 5.35 grams of a material containing cocaine. One
could reasonably infer that the wad of napkins found in the driver’s truck was the same object
defendant had sold to him minutes earlier. Accordingly, we find that the evidence was sufficient
to enable a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant delivered
cocaine.
Affirmed.
/s/ Kurtis T. Wilder
/s/ Harold Hood
/s/ Richard Allen Griffin
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.