State v. White, WD
| Decision Date | 24 June 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. WD,WD |
| Citation | 947 S.W.2d 101 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Clifford L. WHITE, Appellant. 53481. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Kent Denzel, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for Appellant.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Lisa A. Fischer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for Respondent.
Before ULRICH, C.J., P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and EDWIN H. SMITH, JJ.
Clifford L. White appeals his jury-tried conviction in the Circuit Court of Callaway County for tampering in the first degree, § 569.080.1(2), 1 for which he was sentenced to five years of imprisonment. Appellant was charged with knowingly possessing a motor vehicle without the consent of the owner, Westminster College. In his sole point on appeal, appellant claims that the evidence was insufficient for a reasonable jury to convict him of tampering as charged, in that there was no evidence to establish the requisite element that he did not have the consent of the "owner" to possess the vehicle, and thus, the trial court erred in failing to sustain his motion at the close of the State's evidence for a directed verdict of acquittal.
We affirm.
Ralph Young (Young) was a teacher and football coach at Westminster College in Fulton, Callaway County, Missouri. On or about January 30, 1996, as part of his official duties as the football coach, he took a recruiting trip to Lenexa, Kansas. On the trip, he was given permission by the admissions office of the college to use a blue 1995 Ford Taurus belonging to the college.
While in Lenexa on the recruiting trip, Young, because it was very cold outside, started the Taurus so it could warm up, leaving it running outside his hotel room. When he went back outside to leave, he found the vehicle missing and reported it stolen to the local police. Young testified at trial that he never gave permission to the appellant or anyone else to use the 1995 Taurus.
On or about January 31, 1996, Trooper Candy Cornman of the Missouri Highway Patrol observed a blue 1995 Ford speeding on I-70 in Callaway County, Missouri. She identified the appellant as the driver of the vehicle, although when she finally caught up to the vehicle, the appellant was not behind the wheel. She did, however, witness him running around the vehicle when she was approaching it. After running a computer check on the vehicle, she found it had been reported stolen by Young. The trooper testified that the Taurus bore Kansas plates at the time of its stop in Callaway County, although Young testified at the time it was taken it bore Missouri personalized plate "WC6."
After a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Callaway County before the Honorable Gene Hamilton, the appellant was convicted of the class C felony of tampering in the first degree for possessing the 1995 Ford Taurus without Westminster College's consent and was subsequently sentenced to five years imprisonment. This appeal followed.
In a criminal case where the claim is the evidence being insufficient to support the conviction, our appellate review is limited to determining whether from the evidence reasonable jurors could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Grim, 854 S.W.2d 403, 405 (Mo. banc 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 997, 114 S.Ct. 562, 126 L.Ed.2d 462 (1993); State v. Garrison, 896 S.W.2d 689, 690 (Mo.App.1995).
State v. Lopez, 898 S.W.2d 563, 568 (Mo.App.1995).
I.
In his sole point on appeal, appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for tampering in the first degree, § 569.080.1(2). Section 569.080.1(2) provides:
1. A person commits the crime of tampering in the first degree if:
. . . . .
(2) He knowingly receives, possesses, sells, alters, defaces, destroys or unlawfully operates an automobile, airplane, motorcycle, motorboat or other motor-propelled vehicle without the consent of the owner thereof.
Appellant contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to satisfy the requisite element of tampering that he did not have the consent of the "owner," Westminster College, to possess the vehicle. We disagree and affirm.
In order to obtain a conviction for tampering under § 569.080.1(2) as charged, the State was required to prove that appellant possessed the 1995 Taurus without the owner's consent. § 569.080.1(2). Appellant recognizes that the "title" owner of the vehicle in this case was not an individual, but a legal entity, Westminster College. In this respect, he contends that the only individuals who could testify as to the lack of consent to possess the vehicle would be agents of the college who had the authority to consent to its use. Appellant argues that in this case the only person who testified as to a lack of consent was Young, and that he did not possess the necessary authority as to the Taurus to establish by his testimony the lack of consent by the owner, Westminster College. This argument is without merit.
The proof of a lack of consent under § 569.080 is not limited to the testimony of the title owner, but may be provided by the testimony of the person who had the exclusive use and possession of the vehicle at the time of the alleged tampering. State v. Williams, 585 S.W.2d 535, 536 (Mo.App.1979); State v. Ward, 571 S.W.2d 773, 775 (Mo.App.1978). In this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lomax v. Cassady
...of the person who had the exclusive use and possession of the vehicle at the time of the alleged tampering." State v. White, 947 S.W.2d 101, 103 (Mo. App. W.D. 1997). Schneider, who was the employee of the church organization that owned the white 1995 Chevrolet half-ton pickup truck with th......