State v. Naylor

Decision Date14 March 2017
Docket NumberNo. SC 95847,SC 95847
Citation510 S.W.3d 855
Parties STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Orlando M. NAYLOR, Appellant.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Naylor was represented by Casey A. Taylor of the public defender's office in Columbia, (573) 777-9977.

The state was represented by Dora Fichter of the attorney general's office in Jefferson City, (573) 751-3321.

George W. Draper III, Judge

Following a jury trial, Orlando Naylor (hereinafter, "Naylor") was convicted of first-degree burglary, section 569.160, RSMo 2000,1 misdemeanor stealing, section 570.030, and driving while revoked, section 302.321. The circuit court sentenced Naylor as a prior and persistent offender to fifteen years' imprisonment for burglary, one year imprisonment for stealing, and seven years' imprisonment for driving while revoked, to be served concurrently.

Naylor raises three points on appeal. Naylor claims, in two separate points, there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for first-degree burglary. Naylor further claims the circuit court abused its discretion by erroneously admitting testimony that demonstrated Naylor's propensity to engage in criminal activity. The circuit court committed no error; the judgment is affirmed.

Factual and Procedural Background

On May 15, 2014, two employees at the Farm Fresh Milk Store in Collinsville, Illinois, were closing the store for the day and noticed that the change bag was missing. The change bag usually was kept in the back office, which had a sign stating, "Employees only." The employees then viewed their security cameras. An outside security camera showed a car back up to the side of the building at about 2:30 p.m. The car's driver then entered the building. The inside security camera showed the driver went through the store and into the office. The driver searched the desk and filing cabinet where the change bag usually was kept. Upon discovering the change bag, the driver removed the money, went back into the store area, and made a purchase prior to leaving.

After viewing the store's security camera video, the employees called the police. Detective Christopher Warren of the Collinsville Police Department investigated the theft. After viewing the security camera video, he identified the vehicle as a two-door Pontiac Grand Prix. The vehicle was a burnt orange color with "purplish" color stripes. The driver appeared to be wearing light tan pants and a baseball cap.

Also on May 15, 2014, the cook (hereinafter, "Cook") at the Sandwich Shop in Collinsville, Illinois, observed a man in the kitchen at 3 p.m. Cook stated he was the only person allowed in the kitchen, and Cook asked the man what he was doing in the kitchen. The man asked if the Sandwich Shop was hiring. Cook informed him that they were not hiring. Cook noted that the man in the kitchen spoke with a low, raspy voice. The man then departed through the back door.

Another employee from the Sandwich Shop followed the man out the back door and observed him getting into a burnt orange-colored vehicle. That employee recorded the first part of the license plate as "PH5" and noted that there was also a "6" on the license place.

On May 16, 2014, Melissa Giesler (hereinafter, "Giesler") arrived to work in the early morning at Missy's Family Restaurant in Ozora, Missouri. Missy's Family Restaurant had an office that had an "Office" sign on the door. In front of the office, there was a place to hang clothes and some filing cabinets. The office was inaccessible from outside the building; one had to go through an interior hallway to enter it. The nearest exterior door to the office was a side door, which was kept locked and not used by the general public. That side door could only be unlocked from inside the building, and it was accessible through a storeroom that was off of the office.

When Giesler arrived at work, she went into the office and placed her purse on a desk. After the restaurant closed that night, Giesler returned to the office and noticed that $165 was missing from her purse. Giesler also noticed that the side door was unlocked.

Giesler contacted Mitzi Aufdenberg (hereinafter, "Aufdenberg"), the general manager of the nearby Ozora Truck Stop, inquiring as to whether she could look at the truck stop's surveillance tapes. Aufdenberg was able to view some of the surveillance video immediately, but she was unable to view the full surveillance video until the following day. The surveillance video showed a person parking a vehicle at the Ozora Truck Stop, getting out, and walking out of view. Shortly thereafter, the same person returned to the vehicle. Further, the person who exited Missy's Family Restaurant by the side door had the same appearance as the person who had parked at the Ozora Truck Stop.

On May 30, 2014, Officer Jerod Darnell (hereinafter, "Officer Darnell") stopped a car for a traffic violation. The car was a 2001 Pontiac Grand Prix with the license plate "PH5 U6Y." Naylor was the driver. Officer Darnell's partner recognized Naylor's car as matching the description of the Missy's Family Restaurant surveillance video. Naylor was placed under arrest and consented to a vehicle search. Detective Austin Clark (hereinafter, "Detective Clark") was called and arrived on the scene. Detective Clark searched Naylor's car, discovering $675 in cash and a baseball cap.

Subsequently, Detective Clark interviewed Naylor. Detective Clark showed Naylor pictures from the surveillance video at Missy's Family Restaurant, but Naylor denied being the person in the video and maintained he had nothing to do with the crime. Naylor acknowledged the baseball cap was his and explained the cash was from poker winnings and money given to him by his girlfriend.

During their investigation, the police provided the surveillance video from the Farm Fresh Milk Store and Missy's Family Restaurant to Randy Lee Schott (hereinafter, "Schott"), a body shop manager. Schott examined the surveillance video. Schott was able to identify the car in both videos. He noted the car had the same damage and aftermarket additions. Schott determined that, based upon the car's specific characteristics, the cars depicted "appear similar."

Naylor was charged as a prior and persistent offender with one count of first-degree burglary, one count of stealing, and one count of driving with a revoked license. The state charged that Naylor committed first-degree burglary on May 16, 2014, when he knowingly and unlawfully entered a room in Missy's Family Restaurant not open to the public.

The jury found Naylor guilty of first-degree burglary, misdemeanor stealing, and driving while revoked. Naylor appealed. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 10, of the Missouri Constitution.

First-degree burglary

Naylor claims there was insufficient evidence presented at trial to convict him of first-degree burglary. Naylor asserts there was insufficient evidence presented from which the jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that he knowingly entered unlawfully into an area of Missy's Family Restaurant and that another person was present in the structure.

To determine whether the evidence presented was sufficient to support a conviction and to withstand a motion for judgment of acquittal, this Court does not weigh the evidence but, rather, "accept[s] as true all evidence tending to prove guilt together with all reasonable inferences that support the verdict, and ignore[s] all contrary evidence and inferences." State v. Holmes , 399 S.W.3d 809, 812 (Mo. banc 2013) (quoting State v. Latall , 271 S.W.3d 561, 566 (Mo. banc 2008) ). "This Court's review is limited to determining whether there was sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror might have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Letica , 356 S.W.3d 157, 166 (Mo. banc 2011). "This is not an assessment of whether this Court believes that the evidence at trial established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt but rather a question of whether, in light of the evidence most favorable to the State, any rational fact-finder ‘could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.’ " State v. Nash , 339 S.W.3d 500, 509 (Mo. banc 2011) (quoting State v. Bateman , 318 S.W.3d 681, 687 (Mo. banc 2010) ). "In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a criminal conviction, an appellate court ‘does not act as a "super juror" with veto powers' but ‘gives great deference to the trier of fact.’ " State v. Jones , 479 S.W.3d 100, 105 (Mo. banc 2016) (quoting State v. Miller , 372 S.W.3d 455, 463 (Mo. banc 2012) ).

The offense of first-degree burglary occurs when a person "knowingly enters unlawfully or knowingly remains unlawfully in a building or inhabitable structure for the purpose of committing a crime therein." Section 569.160.1. Additionally, one of the following three circumstances exists: (1) the person is armed with a deadly weapon; (2) the person causes or threatens immediate physical injury to any person who is not a participant in the crime; or (3) another person, who is not a participant in the crime, is present in the structure. Id.

Knowingly Entered Unlawfully

Naylor asserts there was insufficient evidence presented from which a juror could conclude that he knowingly entered unlawfully into the office area of Missy's Family Restaurant. Naylor claims the state failed to demonstrate that he knew he was not allowed to be in the office area because the sign on the door to the office only stated, "Office," and there was no indication that restaurant patrons were prohibited from entering.

A person enters or remains unlawfully on a property "when he [or she] is not licensed or privileged to do so." Section 569.010(8). "A license or privilege to enter or remain in a building which is only partly open to the public is not a license or privilege to enter or remain in that part of the building which is not open to the public." Id. "Knowledge is typically inferred from...

To continue reading

Request your trial
44 cases
  • State v. Minor
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 14, 2022
    ...or bad acts in the past." A jury is presumed to follow the circuit court's instructions. Brandolese , 601 S.W.3d at 527 n.7 ; State v. Naylor , 510 S.W.3d 855, 863 (Mo. banc 2017) ; see also State v. Banks , 582 S.W.3d 919, 926 (Mo. App. E.D. 2019) (finding a jury is presumed to follow the ......
  • State v. Johnson
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • March 5, 2019
  • State v. Schurle
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • April 5, 2022
  • State v. Day
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • September 6, 2022
    ...reasonable inferences 651 S.W.3d 848 that support the verdict, and ignore[s] all contrary evidence and inferences.’ " State v. Naylor , 510 S.W.3d 855, 858-59 (Mo. 2017) (citing State v. Holmes , 399 S.W.3d 809, 812 (Mo. banc 2013) ). "This Court's review is limited to determining whether t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT