State v. Merrick, 97-591.
| Docket Nº | No. 97-591. |
| Citation | 299 Mont. 472, 2000 MT 124, 2 P.3d 242 |
| Case Date | May 09, 2000 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Montana |
2 P.3d 242
2000 MT 124
299 Mont. 472
v.
William A. MERRICK, Defendant and Appellant
No. 97-591.
Supreme Court of Montana.
Submitted on Briefs February 10, 2000.
Decided May 9, 2000.
Hon. Joseph P. Mazurek, Attorney General; James Wheelis, Assistant Attorney General; Helena, Montana, Fred Van Valkenburg, Missoula County Attorney; James Mickelson, Deputy County Attorney; Helena, Montana, For Respondent.
Justice JIM REGNIER delivered the Opinion of the Court.
¶ 1 William Merrick appeals from the Judgment of the Fourth Judicial District Court, Missoula County. We affirm.
¶ 2 Merrick raises one issue on appeal:
¶ 3 Whether there was sufficient evidence to support Merrick's conviction for robbery?
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
¶ 4 On March 13, 1997, Erin Legried, a "loss prevention specialist" at Shopko in Missoula, Montana, was on duty in the loss prevention office at the front of the store. At the time of the incident, Ms. Legried was 19 years old and had worked for Shopko as a loss prevention officer for about five months. It was Ms. Legried's job to watch for theft, stop people suspected of shoplifting as they exited the store and bring them back into her office. She testified that she had been involved in approximately 60 arrests or apprehensions.
¶ 5 At about 7:15 p.m., while Ms. Legried was in her office doing paperwork, she heard the security alarm go off and witnessed Merrick exiting the store followed by a female employee. Ms. Legried ran outside and followed Merrick about 50 feet into the Shopko parking lot. Ms. Legried approached Merrick, informed him that he had tripped the alarm system, and requested that Merrick return to the store to straighten things out. When Ms. Legried informed Merrick that he had tripped the alarm system, Merrick responded, "That was my gun. I carry a gun. It sets off the alarms." Ms. Legried testified that "when he said that, he kind of unzipped his coat and reached inside." At that point, Ms. Legried testified that she turned around and yelled for someone to call 911 because she thought Merrick was going to pull out a gun and use it to either shoot her or at least scare her in order to get away. Merrick walked away. A man drove up to Ms. Legried in a car and offered to lend her his cell phone. She called 911. Police Officer Thomas B. Johnson of the Missoula Police Department responded. He stopped Merrick about a block from Shopko and placed him under arrest. During a pat down, Officer Johnson retrieved eight knives and two utility knives from inside Merrick's coat.
¶ 6 On March 27, 1997, the State filed an Information charging Merrick with robbery in violation of § 45-5-401, MCA. In the Information, the State alleged that Merrick purposely or knowingly put Ms. Legried in fear of immediate bodily injury. Merrick was tried by jury and convicted of robbery on May 13, 1997. On July 3, 1997, the District Court sentenced Merrick to a term of 40 years in the Montana State Prison. Merrick appeals.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
¶ 7 We review the sufficiency of the evidence to support a jury verdict to determine whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Morrisey, No. DA 06-0278.
...the weight to be given their testimony and, in the event of conflicting evidence, to determine which will prevail. See State v. Merrick, 2000 MT 124, ¶ 13, 299 Mont. 472, 2 P.3d 242; State v. Baker, 2004 MT 393, ¶ 22, 325 Mont. 229, 104 P.3d 491; State v. Maetche, 2008 MT 184, ¶ 14, 343 Mon......
-
State v. Ugalde, No. DA 11–0366.
...the same point.” Section 26–1–102(4), MCA. It is true that the “testimony of one witness is sufficient to prove a fact.” State v. Merrick, 2000 MT 124, ¶ 13, 299 Mont. 472, 2 P.3d 242. However, cumulative evidence will be deemed harmless “unless the record shows that the error was prejudici......
-
State v. Price, No. 00-432.
...prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Merrick, 2000 MT 124, ¶ 7, 299 Mont. 472, ¶ 7, 2 P.3d 242, ¶ ¶ 15 The District Court's award of credit for time served in this case was based on a statutory inter......
-
State v. Bowen, No. DA 14–0075.
...2008 MT 260, ¶ 35, 345 Mont. 95, 189 P.3d 1201 ; State v. Field, 2005 MT 181, ¶ 18, 328 Mont. 26, 116 P.3d 813 ; and State v. Merrick, 2000 MT 124, ¶ 13, 299 Mont. 472, 2 P.3d 242. “When circumstantial evidence is susceptible of two interpretations, one which supports guilt and the other wh......
-
State v. Morrisey, DA 06-0278.
...the weight to be given their testimony and, in the event of conflicting evidence, to determine which will prevail. See State v. Merrick, 2000 MT 124, ¶ 13, 299 Mont. 472, 2 P.3d 242; State v. Baker, 2004 MT 393, ¶ 22, 325 Mont. 229, 104 P.3d 491; State v. Maetche, 2008 MT 184, ¶ 14, 343 Mon......
-
State v. Ugalde, DA 11–0366.
...the same point.” Section 26–1–102(4), MCA. It is true that the “testimony of one witness is sufficient to prove a fact.” State v. Merrick, 2000 MT 124, ¶ 13, 299 Mont. 472, 2 P.3d 242. However, cumulative evidence will be deemed harmless “unless the record shows that the error was prejudici......
-
State v. Price, 00-432.
...prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Merrick, 2000 MT 124, ¶ 7, 299 Mont. 472, ¶ 7, 2 P.3d 242, ¶ ¶ 15 The District Court's award of credit for time served in this case was based on a statutory inter......
-
State v. Bowen, DA 14–0075.
...2008 MT 260, ¶ 35, 345 Mont. 95, 189 P.3d 1201 ; State v. Field, 2005 MT 181, ¶ 18, 328 Mont. 26, 116 P.3d 813 ; and State v. Merrick, 2000 MT 124, ¶ 13, 299 Mont. 472, 2 P.3d 242. “When circumstantial evidence is susceptible of two interpretations, one which supports guilt and the other wh......