Walters v. State
| Decision Date | 01 December 2016 |
| Docket Number | NO. 2015–KA–01332–SCT,2015–KA–01332–SCT |
| Citation | 206 So.3d 524 |
| Parties | Douglas WALTERS a/k/a Douglas Howard Walters v. STATE of Mississippi |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
OFFICE OF THE STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER, BY: JUSTIN T. COOK, DOUGLAS WALTERS (PRO SE), ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, BY: JEFFREY A. KLINGFUSS, ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE.
EN BANC.
¶ 1. A Rankin County jury found Douglas Walters guilty of grand larceny, and he was sentenced to serve ten years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Walters now appeals to this Court, arguing that the trial court erred in its application of the grand-larceny statute, in quashing a codefendant's subpoena, and in admitting unauthenticated hearsay into evidence. Finding no error, we affirm.
¶ 2. On the morning of February 9, 2012, Robert Nelson drove to his construction company's 140–acre property located off Highway 471 in Brandon, Mississippi. Nelson's company specializes in building roads and bridges, and he uses this property to store construction equipment and materials. Upon arriving at the property, Nelson noticed that the chain securing the front gate had been cut, and a padlock had been attached to the chain in place of the combination lock that normally held it in place. Nelson drove onto the property to investigate. Near the back of the property, Nelson observed a man carrying one of his company's concrete hoppers with a forklift.1 Nelson did not recognize the man, so he called the police.
¶ 3. Bradley Turner with the Brandon Police Department responded to Nelson's property at around 8:00 a.m. Turner identified the man on Nelson's property as Arnold Bailey, and he determined that the forklift had been rented from McGraw Rental & Supply in Ridgeland by Douglas Walters. Later that afternoon, Turner met Walters at Nelson's property so that Walters could retrieve the forklift and return it to McGraw Rental. Turner did not make any arrests at that time.
¶ 4. Nelson reported to Turner that about 150 pieces of heavy-duty steel scaffolding, along with some other materials, were missing from his property. In an effort to locate the missing scaffolding, Turner visited some local recycling mills. Turner located two scale-ticket receipts indicating that Walters had delivered scrap metal to General Recycling in Flowood on February 8 and 9, 2012. Turner obtained a photograph of the February 9 delivery, which depicted Walters's truck pulling a trailer full of metal scaffolding.
¶ 5. On May 2, 2013, Walters and Bailey were indicted for one count of grand larceny, in violation of Section 97–17–41 of the Mississippi Code. The indictment alleged that, on or about February 9, 2012, Walters and Bailey unlawfully took, stole, and carried away steel scaffolding belonging to Nelson and having a value of $500 or more, with the intent to permanently deprive Nelson of this property.2 Walters and Bailey were tried separately.
¶ 6. Shortly after Walters's first trial commenced, the State discovered photographic evidence with possible exculpatory value to Walters. Accordingly, the trial court declared a mistrial and allowed Walters to review this evidence. Walters's second trial also ended in a mistrial, as the jury was unable to reach a verdict after lengthy deliberations. Walters's third and final trial commenced on June 9, 2015.
¶ 7. At trial, Nelson testified that the type of scaffolding he uses in his business is not common because it typically is used in heavy construction projects. He estimated that each piece of scaffolding was worth about $65. During Nelson's testimony, the State introduced into evidence a piece of scaffolding owned by Nelson. Nelson testified that this scaffolding looked identical to the scaffolding in the photograph retrieved from General Recycling. On cross-examination, Nelson admitted that his scaffolding did not have any unique identifying marks and that about fifteen people knew the combination to the lock on the front gate of his property.
¶ 8. Steve Lambright testified that he worked as the scale master for General Recycling, and that he was working the scales on February 9, 2012, when Walters delivered a load of steel scaffolding. Lambright knew Walters as a regular customer of General Recycling. He also explained that General Recycling tracks its customers' transactional information electronically and stores photographs of every transaction. The scale ticket for the February 9 delivery indicated that Walters had delivered 6,880 pounds of metal at 8:27 a.m. and was paid $722.40. The scale ticket and photographs of this transaction were admitted into evidence.
¶ 9. Walters's defense at trial was that he owned the materials that he sold to General Recycling on February 9, 2012. He claimed that these materials had been used to build a house on his property in Brandon, but that he had decided to sell the materials after the house burned down. The State called Bo Edgington with the Brandon Police Department to challenge this defense. Edgington had responded to a house fire at Walters's property on October 10, 2010. Edgington had taken numerous photographs of the property as the fire department raked through the debris. Edgington's photographs were admitted into evidence. Edgington testified that he observed some metal scaffolding in the debris on Walters's property; however, this scaffolding did not look similar to the scaffolding depicted in the photographs retrieved from General Recycling.
¶ 10. Russell Humphreys testified as an expert witness for the State. He was accepted by the trial court as an expert in the area of "price and identification of scaffolding." Humphreys worked as the manager of Direct Scaffold Services in Pearl, Mississippi, a company that sells and rents scaffolding to contractors. Humphreys had worked for Direct Scaffold Services for fifteen years at the time of trial and had an additional four years of experience with another company. Humphreys identified the type of scaffolding depicted in the photographs taken at General Recycling as a "shoring frame," which is used primarily for holding up heavy objects. He testified that he would sell used shoring frames for between $80 and $90 per piece, and he would rent them for $10 per piece, per month. He identified the scaffolding depicted in Edginton's photographs as a "step frame," which is a type of masonry scaffolding.
¶ 11. Walters testified at trial and called several witnesses in his defense. The bulk of the defense witnesses' testimony dealt with the construction of Walters's house around 2010 and the subsequent clearing of his property after the house burned down. Walters admitted to renting a forklift from McGraw Rental on February 7, 2012, and selling a load of scrap metal to General Recycling on February 9, 2012. However, Walters claimed that he owned the scaffolding depicted in the photographs retrieved from General Recycling. Walters stated that he regularly purchased "cars, tractors, motors, pipe," and sold them to scrap yards and recycling mills when the prices were high. When prices were low, he would store these items on his property, where he also lives. He testified that he also owned a large quantity of scaffolding because he previously had attempted to build a house on his property. Walters admitted into evidence a receipt indicating that he had purchased 350 pieces of scaffolding from a man named Sam Young in 2006. Several witnesses testified to visiting Walters's property while he was building his home and seeing scaffolding surrounding the home. The witnesses also confirmed that Walters's house had burned down in 2010.
¶ 12. Several witnesses testified that, on February 8, 2012, Walters and some friends and family members met at his property to clear the debris from the house fire to make room for a new mobile home. Walters testified that he rented a forklift from McGraw Rental to help him clear the property. Walters loaded scrap metal, which included scaffolding that was burned in the house fire, onto a trailer to take to the recycling mill. According to Walters, at the end of the day, Bailey asked to borrow the forklift. Walters obliged, and Bailey drove the forklift off the property. Walters claimed that he did not know why Bailey wanted to borrow the forklift. Walters also stated that the only time he had ever visited Nelson's property was to pick up the forklift from Turner on the evening of February 9, 2012.
¶ 13. At the conclusion of trial, the jury returned a verdict finding Walters guilty of grand larceny. The trial court sentenced him to serve ten years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Walters now appeals to this Court, raising the following issues:
¶ 14. Walters was charged with committing grand larceny in violation of Section 97–17–41 of the Mississippi Code. On the day of the offense, Section 97–17–41 provided:
Every person who shall be convicted of taking and carrying away, feloniously, the personal property of another, of the value of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) or more, shall be guilty of grand larceny, and shall be imprisoned in the Penitentiary for a term not exceeding ten (10) years.
Miss. Code Ann. § 97–17–41 (2013) (emphasis added). In July 2014, after Walters's indictment but before his conviction, the Legislature amended Section 97–17–41 to provide, in pertinent part:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Garcia v. State
...goes to the jury and it is the jury who will ultimately determine the authenticity of the evidence, not the court." Walters v. State , 206 So. 3d 524, 535 (Miss. 2016) (quoting Sewell v. State , 721 So. 2d 129, 140 (Miss. 1998) ). In other words, the State was "not required to rule out all ......
-
Cozart v. State
...will be "sentence[d] [ ] under the version of the ... statute that was in place at the time the crime was committed." Walters v. State , 206 So.3d 524, 531 (Miss. 2016) ; see also Wilson v. State , 194 So.3d 855, 874 (Miss. 2016). Further, Mississippi Code Section 99–19–1"expressly provide[......
- Pinter v. State
-
Morrow v. State
...trial strategy was frustrated or harmed by the absence of the witness who prepared the report, no plain error occurred. Walters v. State , 206 So. 3d 524, 530 (¶ 16) (Miss. 2016) (In order for plain error to be found, the error in question must be "plain, clear, or obvious" and "prejudice[ ......