State v. Funderburke, 2020 Ohio 3847

Dwayne Funderburke was indicted and tried for one count of receiving stolen property (R.C. 2913.51), a fourth-degree felony; a jury convicted him and the trial court sentenced him to 12 months with 79 days credit.
Victim Tammy Ellis reported her 2003 Ford Focus missing on November 13, 2018; she did not know or authorize Funderburke to use the car and reported her keys missing.
Robert Bixler discovered his temporary Subaru license tag affixed to the recovered Ford Focus; he did not give Funderburke permission to use the tag.
Officer Matthew Shipley observed the 2003 Ford Focus, followed it to a dead-end, saw Funderburke exit, kneel at the rear, then approach the officer appearing nervous; after Shipley suggested the car might be stolen, Funderburke walked away.
The Focus had its stereo removed and an interior window switch panel pulled out; no steering-column damage was shown at trial.
Funderburke moved for acquittal at close of the State’s case; the trial court denied the motion and the conviction was later appealed on manifest-weight grounds.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether conviction for receiving stolen property is against the manifest weight of the evidence	State: Possession of a recently stolen car and another’s temporary tag, unexplained and coupled with evasive conduct and interior damage, supports inference defendant knew car was stolen	Funderburke: Possession alone does not prove knowledge; his conduct (didn't immediately flee; spoke with officer) and lack of obvious steering-column damage show no reasonable cause to believe the car was stolen	Affirmed. The court found the evidence, including unexplained possession of recently stolen property, evasive actions, missing stereo/panel, and missing keys, supported the jury’s finding beyond a reasonable doubt

Barnes v. United States, 412 U.S. 837 (1973) (possession of recently stolen property may permit an inference of knowledge if not satisfactorily explained)
State v. Arthur, 42 Ohio St.2d 67 (1975) (Ohio recognizes inference from unexplained possession of recently stolen property)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (standard for reviewing manifest-weight-of-the-evidence claims)
State v. Nicely, 39 Ohio St.3d 147 (1998) (circumstantial evidence may alone support a conviction; definition and use of circumstantial evidence)
State v. Hunter, 131 Ohio St.3d 67 (2011) (manifest-weight review principles reaffirmed)
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1983) (conviction should be overturned on manifest weight only in the exceptional case where evidence heavily weighs against it)
State v. Cooper, 170 Ohio App.3d 418 (2007) (jury credibility determinations are entitled to deference)