Ronicesha Cherron Wearren v. State
03-15-00445-CR
| Tex. App. | Nov 16, 2015Background
- Appellant Ronicesha Wearren was convicted by a jury of felony theft (value $1,500–$20,000) and sentenced to 14 months in state jail with $4,000 restitution; she appealed.
- Owner Juan Rodriguez testified he acquired ~20–25 fence panels in trade (no written receipt) and estimated their value above $3,000 based on new-item quotes from Lowe’s/Home Depot; he did not live on the vacant lot where panels were stored.
- Investigator Justin Kelly contacted Lowe’s and recorded a $4,000 replacement value but made no effort to contact the person who gave Rodriguez the panels or to establish whether the panels were new or used.
- Scrap-yard employee Damien Deville and Appellant testified Appellant was a regular scrapper who brought the panels to the recycling center, provided ID, and said she believed the panels were abandoned.
- Appellant led police to the lot, explained she thought the materials were abandoned (no mailbox, no signs, no house on the lot), and was cooperative throughout.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence as to property value | State: value met felony threshold using replacement/quote evidence (Lowe’s $4,000) | Wearren: State failed to prove fair market value; replacement value used though fair market value was ascertainable | The brief argues the conviction is unsupported because fair market value was not proved and replacement value was improperly relied upon |
| Sufficiency of evidence as to intent to deprive | State: circumstantial evidence (removal, sale) supports intent to deprive | Wearren: she believed panels were abandoned; she gave ID, was cooperative, returned to retrieve remaining panels, and led officer to the site — no intent to steal | The brief argues the evidence fails to show the requisite intent because facts support a reasonable belief the property was abandoned |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (Jackson sufficiency standard is exclusive for appellate review)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (evidence must permit any rational trier of fact to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (appellate courts must avoid permitting convictions based on speculation)
- Griffin v. State, 614 S.W.2d 155 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981) (intent to deprive inferred from words and acts of accused)
- Ingram v. State, 261 S.W.3d 749 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2008) (possibility of taking abandoned property without committing theft)
- King v. State, 174 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2005) (assessing evidence of intent to deprive under facts showing belief property was abandoned)