### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON May 2000 Session
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DARR YL WEBB
Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 98-08710 Joseph B. Dailey, Judge

No. W1999-01585-CCA-R3-CD - August 3, 2000

The Defendant appeals from a jury trial conviction for aggravated burglary, a Class C felony. In this appeal, the Defendant alleges the evidence was not sufficient to support his conviction. Concluding that the evidence

was sufficient, w

e affirm the judgm

ent of the trial co

urt.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgmen

t of the Criminal C

ourt Affirmed.

R OBERT W. W EDEMEYER , J., delivered the op inion of the court, in which S MITH , J. and W ITT , J., joined.

A. C. Wharton, Jr., District Public Defender, Garland Erguden, Assistant District Public Defender, Michael Johnson, Assistant District Public Defender for the appellant, Darryl Webb.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter, Clinton J. Morgan, As sistant Attorney Ge neral, William L. Gibbons, District Attorney Genera

l, Daniel S. Byer, Assistant District Attorney General for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

The Defendant, Darryl Webb, appeals his Shelby County Criminal Court conviction for aggravated burglary, a Class C felony. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-403. After being convicted by a ju ry, the Defendant was sentenced as a Range III persistent offender to fourte en years in the Department

of Correction. In this appeal, he alleges that the evidence was not sufficient to support hi s conviction. Following a review of the record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm th e judgment of the tria

l court.

In the light most

favorable to the State, the evidence at trial revealed that on March 21, 1998, Merazine Williams, the next door neighbor of Andrew Ellis, called the police because she saw a light
on in Ellis's bedroom and she knew that Ellis was not at home. Two police officers responded to the call and found the Defendant in Ellis's bedroom rummaging through an open draw er. After the Defendant

was taken into custody, and after being advised of

his constitutional rights, the Defendant-2-

signed a written waiver

of his rights

and then gave a written statement in which he admitted that he did not know Ellis, did not have permission to be in Ellis's house, and "wanted to go in and see what [he] could get."

In the Def

endant's sole issue, he challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. Specifically, he challenge s the sufficiency of th e evidence demo nstrating that he e

ntered Ellis's hous

e withthe intent to steal. The Defendant testified that he entered the house to sit down, as he was tired from walking and f

rom being up for thr

ee or four days d

oing drugs.

When an accused challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, an appellate court's standard of review is whether, after

considering the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of

the crime beyond a

reasonable doub

t. Jackson v. Virgini

a , 443 U.S. 307, 324 (1 979); State v. Duncan , 698 S.W.2d 63, 67 (Tenn. 1985); Ten n. R. App. P. 13(e). Th is rule applies to f

indings of guilt base

d upon direct evid

ence , circumstantial evidence, or a combination of direct and circumstantial evidence. State v. Dykes , 803 S.W.2d 250, 253 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990).

In determining the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court should not reweigh

or reevaluate the evidence. State v. Mathews , 805 S.W.2d 776, 779 (Ten n. Crim. App. 1990). Questions concerning the credibility of witnesses, the weight and value of the evidence, as well as all factual issues raised by the evidence are resolved by the trier of fact. State v. Cabbage , 571 S.W.2d 832, 835 (Tenn. 1978).

Nor may this Court su

bstitute its inferences for those drawn by the trier of fact from the evidence. Liakas v. State , 286 S.W.2d 856, 859 (Tenn. 1956); Farmer v. State , 574 S.W.2d 49, 51 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1978). On the contrary, this Court must afford the State of Tennessee the strongest legitima te view of the evidence contained in the record as well as all reasonable and legitimate inferences which may be drawn from the evidence. Cabbage , 571 S.W.2d at 835.

In the case at bar, the Defendant argues that the evidence was not sufficient to prove that he entered Ellis's house with the intent to steal. To convict the Defenda nt, th e State was requi

red to prove that the Defendant did the following: (1) entered a habitation (or an

y portion therof) , (2) with the intent to com mit a theft, (3) without the effective consent of the owner, and (4) acted either intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-403.

The direct and circ

umstantial evidenc

e presented dur

ing the Defendan

t's trial was clea

rly sufficient beyond a reasona

ble doubt to support the verdict of the jury. Intent may be inferred from the circumstan ces, an d the circumstanc es in this case dem

onstrate the inten

t of the Defenda

nt to commit a theft. The Defendant's ow n written sta tement given to polic

e at the time of his a

rrest indicates that the Defenda nt "wanted to go in a

nd see what [he] could get." His te stimony at trial contradicting this statement of intent was clearly not deemed credible by the jury.
Based on the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.-3- ___________________________________ ROBERT W. WEDEMEYER, JUDGE