State v. Slocum
2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 158
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Defendant Leonard Slocum sold a custom-made Eastern European mandolin, which he knew was stolen, to a pawn shop on November 26, 2011; he stipulated at trial that he sold the instrument.
- The State charged him with felony receiving stolen property (value ≥ $500); a separate misdemeanor count for guitars was not appealed.
- The sole contested issue at bench trial was the mandolin’s fair market value at the time/place of the theft.
- Owner Knez Jakovac, an experienced musician, testified the mandolin was handmade by a highly regarded luthier in 1998, was collectible, and opined its value might be $4,000–$6,000.
- The pawnbroker paid $30 and believed the item to be a guitar; he admitted he did not know the instrument’s value.
- The trial court convicted Slocum of felony receiving stolen property and sentenced him to five years; Slocum appealed, arguing insufficient evidence of value.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove mandolin’s fair market value ≥ $500 | State: owner’s testimony and experience provided sufficient market-value evidence | Slocum: owner’s opinion was unreliable (emotional bias); pawn purchase of $30 shows low value; State should have produced an appraisal | Affirmed: owner’s testimony was competent evidence of market value; credibility and weight for trial court to assess; evidence supported felony conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Craig, 287 S.W.3d 676 (Mo. banc 2009) (standard of review for sufficiency in court-tried cases)
- State v. Blankenship, 415 S.W.3d 116 (Mo. banc 2013) (appellate sufficiency review principles)
- State v. Hall, 56 S.W.3d 475 (Mo. App. W.D. 2001) (market value at time/place is required element)
- State v. Calicotte, 78 S.W.3d 790 (Mo. App. S.D. 2002) (insufficient value evidence defeats felony stealing charge)
- State v. Williams, 643 S.W.2d 3 (Mo. App. E.D. 1982) (purchase price and age may support value)
- State v. Reilly, 674 S.W.2d 530 (Mo. banc 1984) (owner’s opinion can be substantial evidence of value)
- State v. Jones, 843 S.W.2d 407 (Mo. App. E.D. 1992) (replacement cost insufficient when market value ascertainable)
- State v. Foster, 762 S.W.2d 51 (Mo. App. E.D. 1988) (similar limitation on replacement-cost evidence)
- State v. Wilkes, 891 S.W.2d 581 (Mo. App. E.D. 1995) (age and replacement cost not substitute for market value when market value is ascertainable)