102 A.3d 1163
D.C.2014Background
- Appellant Brenda Grissom was convicted at a bench trial of second-degree theft for two pieces of jewelry worth $72 from Lord & Taylor.
- Loss-prevention officer Cole identified jewelry by UPCs, cross-referenced them in the store system, and concluded they came from the store.
- Cole admitted he did not observe theft or identify the exact items Appellant selected, nor did he obtain a receipt or consult staff about purchases.
- Government argued UPCs were unique identifiers to the store and that scanning them corroborated that the items were those Appellant selected.
- Court reversed, finding UPCs alone could not prove store-specific wrongful obtaining and that evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction.
- The case was remanded with instructions to dismiss the information.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether UPCs alone prove store-specific wrongful obtaining | Grissom argues UPCs are not unique to a single store | Grissom argues UPCs could identify merchandise but not prove theft | UPCs alone insufficient; conviction reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Hartgrove, 919 F.2d 139 (4th Cir. 1990) (UPCs are not unique to a specific retailer; need corroborating evidence)
- Russell v. United States, 65 A.3d 1172 (D.C. 2013) (sufficiency standard on appeal in DC)
- Price v. United States, 985 A.2d 434 (D.C. 2009) (sufficiency of evidence standard for theft)
- Dickerson v. United States, 650 A.2d 680 (D.C. 1994) (standard for reviewing factual findings in sufficiency review)