Sykes v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-00666-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-20-2003 Opinion Author: McMillin, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Felony shoplifting - Sufficiency of evidence - Section 97-23-93(1) Judge(s) Concurring: King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-28-2002 Appealed from: Coahoma County Circuit Court Judge: Larry O. Lewis Disposition: CONVICTED OF FELONY SHOPLIFTING. SENTENCED TO TWO YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MDOC AND THREE YEARS OF POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION. District Attorney: Laurence Y. Mellen Case Number: 2001-0100 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Clarence Sykes |
DAVID LYDELL TISDELL |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: CHARLES W. MARIS |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Felony shoplifting - Sufficiency of evidence - Section 97-23-93(1) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Clarence Sykes was found guilty of felony shoplifting and was sentenced to two years with three years post-release supervision. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Sykes argues that the evidence is insufficient, because the uncontradicted fact that he did not either leave the premises or make some overt effort to leave the premises without paying for the steaks prevents him from being convicted of shoplifting as a matter of law. Pursuant to section 97-23-93(1), the crime of shoplifting is complete at the time the defendant wilfully and unlawfully takes possession of any merchandise owned or held by and offered or displayed for sale by any store or other mercantile establishment with the intention and purpose of converting such merchandise to his own use without paying the merchant’s stated price therefor. There is nothing within the statutory definition that requires that the property be physically removed from the premises as an essential element of the crime. Here, there was evidence that the defendant, at a time when he thought he was unobserved, was seen to purposely conceal two packaged steaks on his person and proceed toward the checkout counter. Rather than offering any explanation as to why he would conceal the merchandise under his clothing, he simply denied that he had done so which created a disputed issue of fact to be resolved by the jury. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
