PEOPLE OF MI V BENJAMIN CHAMBERS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
June 12, 1998
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 197730
Recorder’s Court
LC No. 95-013824
ROBERT JACKSON, a/k/a BENJAMIN
CHAMBERS,
Defendant-Appellant.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 197840
Recorder’s Court
LC No. 94-010221
BENJAMIN CHAMBERS,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Wahls, P.J., and Jansen and Gage, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Following separate bench trials, defendant was convicted of possession of 50 grams or more
but less than 225 grams of cocaine, MCL 333.7403(1) and (2)(a)(iii); MSA 14.15(7403)(1) and
(2)(a)(iii) (Docket No. 197730), and possession with intent to deliver less than 50 grams of cocaine,
MCL 333.7401(1) and (2)(a)(iv); MSA 14.15(7401)(1) and (2)(a)(iv) (Docket No. 197840).
Defendant was sentenced to ten to twenty years’ imprisonment on the possession conviction and to two
to twenty years’ imprisonment on the possession with intent to deliver conviction. These sentences are
to be served consecutively. Defendant appeals as of right. We affirm.
-1
In Docket No. 197730, we have reviewed the record and we find that, when the testimony of
Detroit police officer Allen Thomas is viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier
of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant knowingly possessed 112.57 grams
of cocaine without legal authorization to do so. People v Wolfe, 440 Mich 508, 515, 516-517; 489
NW2d 748 (1992), amended 441 Mich 1201 (1992).
In Docket No. 197840, we have reviewed the record and we find that, when the testimony of
Detroit police officer Jeffrey Clyburn is viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational
trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant possessed 2.7 grams of
cocaine without legal authorization to do so and with the intent to deliver it. Wolfe, supra.
Affirmed.
/s/ Myron H. Wahls
/s/ Kathleen Jansen
/s/ Hilda R. Gage
-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.
