State v. Erica Lynn Fuller
2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 11955
| Tex. App. | 2015Background
- Fuller was Brentwood Terrace's bookkeeper and managed two Brentwood bank accounts: a trust account for residents and an operating account for Brentwood's own funds.
- Trust deposits for room and board were supposed to go into the trust account and then be transferred to the operating account; Fuller handled deposits and transfers but could not sign trust checks.
- During 2010, cash deposits intended for the operating account and for specific residents (notably Lawler, Boswell, Ballard, Hughes) were not deposited or were misrecorded, leading to a missing-funds audit.
- A December 2010 audit uncovered missing cash and transfers from the trust to the operating account, including transfers tied to Hughes, Lawler, Boswell, and Ballard.
- Evidence showed Fuller recorded payments and transferred funds to the operating account, sometimes without adequate trust deposits, and Brentwood later replenished Hughes’ trust fund after the audit.
- After investigation, Fuller was terminated; the jury found her guilty of theft of more than $1,500 but less than $20,000, and the trial court later granted a judgment of acquittal notwithstanding the verdict.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Fuller unlawfully appropriate Hughes’ funds? | State: Fuller exercised control over funds by transferring them to the operating account to conceal missing deposits. | Fuller: Transfers were within her authority as bookkeeper and did not deprive Hughes of funds. | Yes; evidence supports unlawful appropriation of Hughes’ funds. |
| Was there intent to deprive Hughes of property? | State: Transfers and concealment demonstrate intent to deprive Hughes regardless of eventual replenishment. | Fuller: No intent to deprive since funds were eventually credited and replenished. | Yes; intent to deprive could be inferred from repeated non-deposits and redirection to cover shortfalls. |
| Is the evidence legally sufficient to sustain a verdict of theft beyond a reasonable doubt? | State: The record shows unlawful appropriation and intent; the jury could convict. | Fuller: The transfer of funds within authority and eventual reimbursement negate sufficiency. | Yes; the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, supports theft beyond a reasonable doubt. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (legal-sufficiency standard for appellate review follows Jackson v. Virginia)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court 1979) (standard for legal sufficiency of evidence in criminal cases)
- Stewart v. State, 44 S.W.3d 582 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (theft can be complete when control is exercised over property without possession)
- Gorman v. State, 634 S.W.2d 681 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982) (theft elements include deprivation without owner’s consent regardless of possession)
- Huff v. State, 897 S.W.2d 829 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1995) (theft may be proven by showing employee lacked authority to dispose of or appropriate property)