Ellett v. StateEllett v. State
Appellant was convicted on March 14, 1977 by a jury in the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial District of Tallahatchie County, Mississippi, of receiving stolen property. She was sentenced to five years in the State Penitentiary with three years suspended pending good behavior. Appellant has assigned as error the trial court‘s refusal to grant peremptory instructions at the close of the State‘s evidence and at the close of all the evidence. We reverse.
On March 13, 1976, Sunflower County authorities had traced a stolen cotton trailer to an auction being held in Inverness, Mississippi. Upon inquiry of the auction promoters,
Other evidence for the State consisted of the identification of the items by their owners, none of whom could pinpoint the date when the items were stolen. The Sheriff of Tallahatchie County testified that defendant stated to him, after being advised of her rights, that the items came from a building owned by her which she was dismantling in Webb, Mississippi. This statement was also given to the arresting officer, Sheriff Jack Sessums of Sunflower County. Sheriff Sessums was used for the introduction of a piece of paper purportedly written by the appellant directing the auction authorities to send the proceeds from the sales to an address in Webb, Mississippi. Although the sheriff was not the proper party to introduce this evidence, no objection was made at the trial and no assignment was made to this Court, and the matter is therefore not before us. This, in essence, was the entire case presented by the State during trial.
Guilty knowledge is the gist of the offense of receiving stolen property, made a crime by
It is apparent from the record in this case that there is not a scintilla of evidence of the circumstance whereby the appellant Colie Ellett received the property “knowing” the same to have been stolen. The evidence offered by the State showed that appellant acquired possession of the property from a building owned by her, which she was dismantling. No evidence was offered to rebut this, or prove its inconsistency, and the State therefore wholly failed to prove either defendant‘s knowledge, or such circumstances that would constitute defendant‘s knowledge, that the items were stolen when she received them. As was said in Johnson, supra, the most that can be said of the State‘s evidence was that defendant had in her possession stolen property. There is no evidence that she received it knowing that it had been stolen.
We are of the opinion that appellant was erroneously convicted of receiving stolen property, and the judgment is reversed and it is ordered that she be discharged.
REVERSED AND APPELLANT DISCHARGED.
PATTERSON, C.J., SMITH and ROBERTSON, P. JJ., and SUGG, WALKER, BROOM, LEE, BOWLING and COFER, JJ., concur.