Ezell v. State
| Docket Number: | 2005-KA-00581-COA Linked Case(s): 2005-KA-00581-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-12-2006 Opinion Author: Chandler, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Receiving stolen property - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Southwick, Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-23-2004 Appealed from: Lincoln County Circuit Court Judge: Mike Smith Disposition: CONVICTED OF TWO COUNTS OF RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY WITH A VALUE OF OVER $500 AND SENTENCED AS A HABITUAL OFFENDER TO TEN YEARS ON EACH COUNT IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY, TOTAL FINE OF $20,000 AND TOTAL RESTITUTION OF $8,750. District Attorney: DEE BATES Case Number: 04-209-MS |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Jody Ezell a/k/a Jody M. Ezell |
DAVID FITZGERALD LINZEY |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JOSE BENJAMIN SIMO |
|
|
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: | Receiving stolen property - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Jody Ezell was convicted of two counts of receiving stolen property with a value of over $500. He was sentenced as a habitual offender to ten years on each count. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Ezell argues that the State's evidence points to Ezell himself having stolen the property and, therefore, he could not have been convicted of receiving stolen property. The law has been that if in a trial for the offense of receiving stolen property, the evidence shows the defendant is guilty of the larceny of that property, the defendant cannot be convicted of receiving stolen property. The law has been further refined to the effect that one who acted as an accessory before the fact to larceny and who received the goods after the theft, but was not present at the actual caption and asportation of the goods, may be indicted for either larceny or for receiving stolen goods, but not for both. Here, there was direct evidence that Ezell had obtained the property from a third person because Ezell told an officer that he had obtained the motorcycle and trailer from David Freeman and told someone else that he had obtained them from someone in Tylertown. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, a finding is justifiable that the defendant was not a principal to larceny. Ezell also argues that there was insufficient evidence on the element of guilty knowledge to support his conviction because his conduct after acquiring the motorcycle was inconsistent with his having known the motorcycle was stolen property. Despite Ezell's open use of the motorcycle, there was sufficient evidence on the element of guilty knowledge to sustain Ezell's conviction of receiving stolen property. The significance of Ezell's use of the motorcycle was a matter for the jury to weigh. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
