State v. Merchant, 63787
| Decision Date | 22 February 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 63787,63787 |
| Citation | 871 S.W.2d 102 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Arthur MERCHANT, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Susan K. Eckles, St. Louis, for appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Mary Moulton Bryan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Defendant appeals the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for attempted stealing of property worth over $150 in violation of §§ 564.011.1 and 570.030, RSMo 1986. We affirm.
The evidence adduced at trial revealed the following: On the morning of December 24, 1991, Sam Greco looked out his office window and observed Defendant walking toward a horse trolley parked on the vacant lot across the street. Greco saw Defendant climb into the trolley. Greco then saw a large piece of brass piping being thrown off the trolley. When Greco saw Defendant get off the trolley and bend the brass piping into thirds, he called 911. Greco then saw Defendant re-enter the trolley and come back out with more brass pieces. Greco also saw Defendant put a couple of small brass pieces in his pocket.
Officer Pipes responded to the 911 call. When he arrived, Defendant was standing five or six feet from the trolley, holding a long piece of brass and bending it into thirds. Officer Pipes placed Defendant under arrest and searched him. The officer discovered two brass end caps in each of Defendant's coat pockets. Defendant also had a slotted screwdriver, a Phillips screwdriver, a wrench, and a magnet in his rear pants pocket. Officer Pipes testified magnets are used by people who collect scrap metal to determine if a metal is iron or steel because these metals are of no value as scrap.
Daniel Apted also testified at trial. He stated his company designed the trolley and he was in charge of its care. Apted stated the brass railings on the trolley were custom-made and the raw materials for the brass railings and their brackets cost $500. Apted also testified he did not give the Defendant permission to remove the railings.
Defendant took the stand in his own behalf. He stated, on the morning of December 24, 1991, he was walking to the Salvation Army when he passed a vacant lot with a horse trolley parked on it. He looked inside the trolley and saw some wine bottles and some tools. He stepped inside the trolley, picked up the tools, and put them in his pocket. When he turned to exit the trolley, the railing shifted forward. He tried to grab it, but it was too heavy and fell to the ground, bending on impact. He then tried to pull the railing back onto the trolley, but it got caught on the trolley's hitch and bent again.
Defendant also stated the brass caps found in his pocket fell off the railing when it hit the ground. Defendant said he picked them up and put them in his pocket, but he did not intend to steal them. Instead, he planned to try to find the owner of the trolley, but the police arrived before he was able to do so.
At trial, Defendant filed a motion for acquittal at the close of the State's evidence and the close of all evidence, arguing the State failed to present evidence sufficient to convict Defendant. The trial court overruled both motions and submitted the case to the jury. The jury found Defendant guilty of attempted stealing of property worth over $150. Defendant was sentenced as a prior offender to jail time already served.
Defendant now appeals alleging the trial court erred in denying his motions for acquittal and his motion for a new trial because the State failed to submit sufficient evidence to convince a reasonable trier of fact Defendant committed all the elements of attempted stealing.
In order for a defendant to be entitled to a directed verdict of acquittal, there must be insufficient evidence from which a reasonable person could have found the defendant guilty as charged. State v. Blue, 811 S.W.2d 405, 409 (Mo.App.1991). In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the evidence and all of its reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the State, disregarding any evidence or inferences to the contrary. Id. at 409.
Section 564.011.1, RSMo 1986, provides:
A person is guilty of attempt to commit an offense when, with the purpose of committing the offense, he does any act which is a substantial step towards the commission of the offense.
Further, § 570.030.1 states:
A person commits the crime of stealing if he appropriates property or services of another with the purpose to deprive him thereof, either without his consent or by means of deceit or coercion.
If the value of the property or services appropriated is over $150, the stealing becomes a Class C felony. § 570.030.3(1). Therefore, attempted felony stealing may be accomplished by a purpose to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Gartner
...374 (1973); State v. Brown, 209 Kan. 493, 496 P.2d 1340 (1972); Lester v. Com., 30 Va.App. 495, 518 S.E.2d 318 (1999); State v. Merchant, 871 S.W.2d 102 (Mo.App.1994); Anderson v. State, 871 S.W.2d 900 (Tex. App.1994); Roundtree v. State, 191 Ga. App. 423, 382 S.E.2d 173 (1989); Brewer v. C......
-
State v. Hall
..."In Missouri, the purchase price and the age of an item are sufficient to establish its value under section 570.020." State v. Merchant, 871 S.W.2d 102, 104 (Mo. App. 1994) (citation omitted). In that regard, the record reflects that Deborah testified that she and her husband had purchased ......
-
State v. Ballenger
...items he concealed under the coat, and were indicative of his purpose to complete the theft." Id. at 266; see also State v. Merchant, 871 S.W.2d 102, 104 (Mo.App. E.D.1994) (holding that the defendant was guilty of attempting to steal goods worth over $150 when defendant took the affirmativ......
-
State v. Shivelhood, 20895
...steal property over $150, accompanied by an act which is a substantial step toward the commission of that crime." State v. Merchant, 871 S.W.2d 102, 104 (Mo.App. E.D.1994). On appeal, Defendant does not contend that the items at issue were worth less than $150, nor does he contend that he l......