Creech v. State

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s unpublished memorandum, in which it affirms Joshua D. Creech’s convictions and sentences.

I disagree with the majority’s assertion that “evidence of the appellant’s prior drug use and previous drug charges were relevant to establish that he had knowledge of what was contained in the vial and, thus, that he knowingly possessed the methamphetamine.” For this proposition, the majority relies on McDaniel v. State, 589 So.2d 767 (Ala.Crim.App.1991), Nation v. State, 627 So.2d 1156 (AIa.Crim.App.1993), and Eady v. State, 495 So.2d 1161 (Ala.Crim.App.1986).…