PEOPLE OF MI V TONY GEORGE LUCIO
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
December 1, 2000
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 217297
Monroe Circuit Court
LC No. 98-029143-FH
TONY GEORGE LUCIO, II,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Cavanagh, P.J., and Talbot and Meter, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals by right from his convictions by a jury of possession of less than
twenty-five grams of cocaine, MCL 333.7403(2)(a)(iv); MSA 14.15(7403)(2)(a)(iv), and
maintaining a drug house, MCL 333.7405(d); MSA 14.15(7405)(d). We affirm.
Defendant argues that the prosecution presented insufficient evidence to support his
convictions. We disagree. Indeed, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the
prosecution, a rational trier of fact could have found that the essential elements of the charged
crimes were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. See People v Wolfe, 440 Mich 508, 515; 489
NW2d 748 (1992), amended 441 Mich 1201 (1992), and People v Johnson, 460 Mich 720, 723;
597 NW2d 73 (1999).
With respect to the possession conviction, the evidence indicated that cocaine was found
among other personal items belonging to defendant and that defendant admitted to a police
officer that the cocaine was his. This evidence sufficiently supported the conviction. Although
the defense offered an alternative explanation at trial for the presence of the cocaine on a shelf of
defendant’s dresser, it was up to the jury to evaluate and resolve any credibility disputes. Wolfe,
supra, 514-515.
With respect to the conviction for maintaining a drug house, the evidence, viewed most
favorably to the prosecution, was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable
doubt that defendant knowingly kept or maintained a dwelling that was used for keeping
controlled substances. Id. at 515; MCL 333.7405(d); MSA 14.15(7405)(d). Indeed, the presence
of drugs and drug packaging materials in defendant’s home indicated that the home was used for
keeping drugs at some point prior to their sale. Moreover, defendant’s knowledge that the home
was being used for keeping drugs could be inferred from the presence of cocaine in his room, his
-1-
admission that the cocaine belonged to him, his statement to police that his housemate kept a
scale in the house, his statement to police that he occasionally sold cocaine, and the presence of
drug packaging materials in the kitchen area and storage shed. Again, to the extent that any of
this evidence was contradicted by other evidence, it was up to the jury to resolve the disputes.
Wolfe, supra at 514-515. No error occurred.
Affirmed.
/s/ Mark J. Cavanagh
/s/ Michael J. Talbot
/s/ Patrick M. Meter
-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.
