State v. Samples
272 P.3d 788
Utah Ct. App.2012Background
- Brandon Samples was convicted of theft by receiving stolen property under Utah Code § 76-6-408 (Supp. 2011).
- The State alleged Samples received a stolen teal Toyota Avalon that had been reported stolen from West Valley City on August 14, 2009.
- The car was located at American Fork Hospital the morning of August 14, 2009, with Samples in the driver’s seat and another in the passenger seat.
- Samples identified the car’s owner inconsistently and told an officer the car belonged to “Jennifer Thomas,” which matched the gym card allegedly in the car.
- The Avalon was recovered on December 23, 2009, at a Price-area apartment complex; the radio and CD changer were damaged/removed.
- The jury convicted Samples, and he appealed arguing insufficient evidence of knowledge that the car was stolen; the court affirmed after plain error review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge of theft element, sufficiency of evidence | Samples’s knowledge of theft was insufficient | State argues circumstantial evidence supports knowledge | Not plainly insufficient; evidence could support knowledge but not plain error to submit |
| Plain error review applicability | Plain error not preserved; should not reverse | Plain error requires obvious, fundamental error | No plain error; substantiates affirmance based on preserved record |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Holgate, 10 P.3d 346 (Utah Supreme Court 2000) (plain-error review governs when insufficiency is not obvious)
- State v. Lyman, 966 P.2d 278 (Utah Court of Appeals 1998) (jury may weigh competing inferences of knowledge)
- State v. Workman, 852 P.2d 981 (Utah Supreme Court 1993) (jury credibility and inference drawing)
- State v. Pierce, 722 P.2d 780 (Utah Supreme Court 1986) (jury free to weigh evidence and draw conclusions)