Harris v. State, A99A0815.
| Decision Date | 30 August 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. A99A0815.,A99A0815. |
| Citation | 521 S.E.2d 864,239 Ga. App. 723 |
| Parties | HARRIS v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Coppedge, Leman & Ward, David L. McGuffey, Dalton, for appellant.
Kermit N. McManus, District Attorney, for appellee.
Based on evidence that she was the lessee of the premises where stolen tools and equipment were found, Beverly Harris was convicted of two counts of theft by receiving stolen property. She challenges the conviction on the ground of insufficient evidence. We reverse.
Construed in favor of the verdict, the evidence showed that Harris' husband with whom she lived participated in burglarizing Gunters Automotive. Another burglary at Gunters and at Dalton Industrial Systems also occurred shortly thereafter. The burglars took many of the stolen items to Harris' leased residence, where two months later police discovered the stolen equipment (including a floor jack, a tool and die set, and a welder) and the stolen tools (including wrenches, a socket set, and a sledge hammer). All of these items were found in a storage room at the back of the house, with the exception of a full tool box found in the living room of the house. The only witness to testify to Harris' knowledge of the items was her husband, who testified she knew nothing about them.
OCGA § 16-1-5. OCGA § 16-8-7( a) sets forth the elements of the crime of theft by receiving stolen property:
A person commits the offense of theft by receiving stolen property when he receives, disposes of, or retains stolen property which he knows or should know was stolen unless the property is received, disposed of, or retained with intent to restore it to the owner. "Receiving" means acquiring possession or control or lending on the security of the property.
Scienter, i.e., the knowledge that the property was stolen, is an essential element of the crime. Dunbar v. State, 228 Ga.App. 104, 107(1)(b), 491 S.E.2d 166 (1997). Here the only evidence presented by the State was that police found the stolen goods at the house Harris leased and occupied. Assuming such showed Harris possessed the goods, "evidence of unexplained possession of recently-stolen goods, standing alone, will not support a conviction for theft by receiving stolen goods, in that it is insufficient in itself to infer guilty knowledge." Weldon v. Barnes, 251 Ga. 689, 691(3), 309 S.E.2d 137 (1983).
The State argues that because the tools were unusual and expensive and were plainly visible in the living room and storage room, and because Harris' husband was a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miller v. State
...Knowledge that the property in question was stolen is an essential element of the crime of theft by receiving. Harris v. State, 239 Ga.App. 723, 724, 521 S.E.2d 864 ( 1999). The jury may infer that knowledge "from circumstances which would excite suspicion in the mind of an ordinary prudent......
-
IN RE JT, A99A2051.
... ... In the instant case, the state argues that Officer Cole was in the lawful discharge of his duties the first time he tried to stop ... ...
-
Crowder v. State, A04A1870.
...1. See Wilson v. State, 256 Ga.App. 741(1), 569 S.E.2d 640 (2002). 2. See id. 3. OCGA § 16-8-7(a). 4. See id.; Harris v. State, 239 Ga.App. 723, 724, 521 S.E.2d 864 (1999). 5. See Slaughter v. State, 240 Ga.App. 758, 760(6), 525 S.E.2d 130 (1999). 6. Id. 7. Harris, supra. 8. See Donaldson v......
-
In re J.L.
...and punctuation omitted.) In the Interest of M.G., 233 Ga.App. 23, 503 S.E.2d 302 (1998). 2 OCGA § 16-8-7(a). 3 Harris v. State, 239 Ga.App. 723, 724, 521 S.E.2d 864 (1999) (wife's conviction reversed where evidence did not show that she knew that her husband had stolen the tools found in t......