No. 06-14-00173-CR

__________________________________________________________________________

IN THE SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

AT TEXARKANA, TEXAS

__________________________________________________________________________ ROCHELLE SCHELLING Appellant,
v. THE STATE OF TEXAS Appealed from the 124th District Court Gregg County, Texas

__________________________________________________________________________ BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT

__________________________________________________________________________ Clement Dunn State Bar No. 06249300 140 East Tyler, Suite 240 Longview, Texas 75601 Telephone: 903-753-7071 Fax: 903-753-8783

ORAL ARGUMENT WAIVED ACCEPTED 06-14-00173-CR SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 12/22/2014 4:44:47 PM DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERKID EN TITYOF P AR TIES AN D C OU NSE L Appellant certifies that the foll owing is a complete list of all parties to the trial cour t’s jud g me nt a

nd the name s and

a dd re sse s o f t he ir tr ia l and a pp e llate c ouns e l. 1. Appellant: Rochelle Sche lling 2. Appellant’s Trial Counsel: Clement Dunn Attorney at L aw 140 E. Tyler Stree t, Suit e 240 L ong view, TX 75601 TSB No. 06249300 3. Appellant’s Counsel on Appe al: Clement Dunn Attorney at L aw 140 E. Tyler Stree t, Suit e 240 L ong view, TX 75601 TSB No. 06249300 4. Attor

ne y fo r t he State : Christ op he r B ott o

A s s i s t an tD i s tr i c tA tt o r

n e y, G r e g gC o un ty 101 East Methvin St., S uite 333 L ong view, Te x as 75601 TSB No. 24064926

iTA BLE O F CO NT EN TS

I D EN T I T Y O F P AR TI ES AND C OUN S EL . ........................................... i T A BLE O F C ON TE NT S . ....................................................... i i I N D EX O F A UT HORI TI ES . .................................................... iii S TA TE ME NT OF THE C A S E . ................................................. 1 S TA TE ME NT REGARDI

NG ORAL A R G U M EN T . ................................. 1 I S S UE PR ES ENTED . .......................................................... 1 S TA TE ME NT O F TH E F AC TS . ................................................... 2 S UMMARY OF THE AR GUMEN T . ................................................ 3 A R GUM EN T . ............................................................... 3 P R A Y E R . .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... . . 5 C E R T I F I C A T E O F S E R V I C E . .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... . 6 C E R T I F I C A T E O F W O R D C O U N T . .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... 6

iiIN DE X O F AU THORITI ES Cases
Hill v. St ate, 633 S.W.2d 520 (Tex. C rim. App. 1981)..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 J a c k s o nv . V i r g i n i a , 4 4 3 U . S
. 3 0 7 ( 1 9 7 9 )
. . ....................................... 5 Dricha s v. State, 175 S.W . 3d 795,798 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Co nst it ut ion al P r ov isi ons Section 31.03(e) (4)( D) of the Texas Penal Code.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 S e c t i o n3 1
. 0 3 ( a ) o f

th e T e x a s P e n a l C o d e . ....................................... 3 S e c t i o n3 1
. 0 1 ( 4 ) o f

th e P e n a l C o d e . ............................................ 3 S e c t i o n1 5 . 0 1 ( a ) , T e x a s P e n a l C o d e . ........................................... 4

iiiBRI EF OF A PPEL L ANT, ROC HEL L E PA GE 1 STA TEM EN T OF THE C ASE Offe nse: Theft Ver dict: Guilty ; Fiftee n (15) months confine ment - Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice - State Jail Divisi on Date of Ver dict: J une 30, 2014 Tr ia l Co ur

t: 12 4 Di stric t Co ur

t, Gre g gCounty , T e xas. th This case involves a prose cution for The ft, a State Jail Felony , based on a n enhanc ement of the underlying c harg e under Section 31.03(e) (4)( D), Te x as Penal Code, alleg ing prior theft convic tions. C.R ., at 4. The A ppellant wave d her right to a jur y trial, and proce eded in a

bench tr ial on her ple a of “ not guilty .” C.R., at 10;12. At the conclusion of this trial, the Court found the Appellant “ guilty .” C.R., at 112; R.R. 3, at 46-48. Following the pre paration of a pre sentenc e re port, the Court held a he aringon sentenc ing; at the
c on c lus ion

of that he ari ng , th e Court

se nte nc e d th e Ap pe llate to s e rv e fi ft e e n mo nth s’ confine ment in a State J ail. R.R.3, at 48; R .R.4, at 16.

STATE MENT REGA RDING ORAL ARG UMENT Be lievi n g t h e i n stant case contains issues ca pable of resolution on the basis of re cord and the Appe llant respec tfully does not reque st oral ar gument.

ISSU E P RE SEN TED The e vidence at trial wa s leg ally insufficient to show beyond a re asonable doubt that the Appellant c ommitt ed thef t.BRI EF OF A PPEL L ANT, ROC HEL L E PA GE 2 STA TEM EN T OF THE F AC TS At tri al , t h e S t ate f

irst called De stinee Jeffer y to testify . Ms. J eff

ery testified that she
was wor king at Wal-Mart on the date of this alleg ed thef t. R.R.3, at 13-14. She de scribed he r encounte r wit h the Appellant, who pus hed a shopping cart containing se vera l items past the are a when the cash reg isters are within the s tore. Seeingthis, Ms. J eff ery intervene d, g rabbingthe
car t, and conf

rontingthe Appellant. R.R.3, at 14-16. When M s . J eff

ery asked the Appellant if she ha d a re ceipt for the merc handise in the shopping c art, th e Ap p el l an t replied that she w as g oing to the c ar to g et her money . The Ap pe lla nt l e ft the sto re–le avin g a ll of the me rc ha nd ise , sti ll in the sh op pin g c art , be hin d. Ms. J eff ery watche d her w alking into the parking lot, a nd testified that she tried to g et in a car , but was de nied per

mission by

the people in it; the Appellant next walked towa rds a g as station and did ge t into a car

with someone. R.R.3, at 15-16. Offic ers of

the L ong view Police De partment arr ested the A ppellant appr ox imately

one and a ha lf mil e s awa

y , a bo ut t we nty-f ive min ute s a ft e r t

he e ve nt i n q

ue sti on ha d o c c ur e d at Wa lMart. R.R.3, at 31-34. Off icer Glenn De rr of

the L ong view Police De partment testified that after takingthe Appellant into custody , he re turned he r to Wal-Mart. The n she wa s identified as the person involved in the e ncounter with Ms. J eff

ery . I d., at 34-37. Th e State a lso int

ro du c e d a vid e ota pe ma de by

re c or din ge qu ipm e nt at Wa l- Ma rt . T his tape de picts the enc ounter be tween Ms. Jeffe ry and t h e Ap pellant at the f ront of the store
. Offe red at R.R.3, at 19, thi s appea rs as Exhibit3(R.R.5); the t ap e shows Ms. J eff ery approa chingthe Appellant and g rabbing the shoppingcar t within the store. The Appe llant never leave s the store with any

of the prope rty

she is alleg ed to have stolen.BRI EF OF A PPEL L ANT, ROC HEL L E PA GE 3 SUMMAR

Y OF THE ARGUM ENT The State fa iled to prove that the A ppellant committed theft by leg ally sufficie nt evidenc e: the re cord that the Appellant neve r complete d an “a ppropriation” of

the prope rty .
ARG UMENT Se c tio n 3 1. 03 (a) o f t

he Te xas P e na l Co de de fi ne s th e of fe ns e of the ft : (a) Ape rson

c omm its an o ff

e ns e of he un lawf

ull y a pp ro pr iate s p ro pe rt

y wi th intent to deprive the owner of proper ty . Section 31.01(4) of

the Penal Code de fines the ter m “appr opriate” : (4 ) “ Ap pr op ri ate ” me ans : (A) to br ing a

bout a transf

er of purporte d t ra n s fer

of title to or other nonpossessory

interest in prope rty , whether to the actor

or anothe r; or (B ) to ac quire or othe rwise e x er ci s e control over prope rty other than r eal proper ty . In th e ins tant ca se , the Ap pe lla nt ne ith e r “a c qu ir e d” no r “e xer c ise d co ntr ol” ov e r t he pr op e rt

y she alleg edly

“appr opriated”
. Severa l salient points arise re g ardingthe issue: 1. The Appe llant never left pre mises under the c ontrol of t he owner of the property . She
ne ve r e xite d th e sto re . T hat th e Ap pe lla nt n e ve r “ a c qu ir e d” or

“ c ontr oll e d” the pr op e rt

y become s clea

r whe n a st o re employ ee takes control of the shoppingcar

t–and the proper ty within it–entirely

within the store itself. 2. The prope rty

at all times remaine d in the shopping c art–whic h belong ed to t he st ore ( the “owne r”) . The indictment does n ot alleg e–and no othe r implication arises f rom the
rec ord–that the Appe llant “stole,” or committed theft, of the shoppingcar t itself. Thus at all times the proper

ty rema in ed withi n premises (the store itself) c ontrolled by theSee and c f. Hill v. State, 633 S.W .2d 520 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981), on which the trial 1 court re lied. See R.R.3, at 47. In Hill, the appellant had a ctually conce aled a

handgun (the stolen proper ty) under his shirt. I d., at 521. This provides a significant distinction betwee n the fa cts of Hill and the fa cts of the instant ca se. BRI EF OF A PPEL L ANT, ROC HEL L E PA GE 4 owner and within other prope rty (the shoppingcar

t) in the possession of and under the control of the owner( i.e., not alleg ed to have been “ appropriated by the Appellant)
. 3. The facts reflec t no conce alment, or eff ort to conce al, any of the items from plain view of the pu bli c , s tor e e mpl oye e s, or

c ame ra s, by

the Ap pe lla

nt. 1 4. The Appe llant did not alter, impair, or damag e any of the items. 5. The “ tag s,” indicatingowner ship by the store, we re not remove d, altere d, or impaired in any way by the Appellant. 6. The Appe llant at no time trespassed or in any way enter ed any ar ea not open to the public. 7. The re cord indicates no ac t on the part o f t h e Appellant to conc eal he rself f rom the public view, or disguise her a ppear ance in any

way . Th e Ap pe lla

nt t hu s d id n ot “a c qu ir e ” or “ e xer c ise c ontr ol” ov e r t he pr op e rt

y in
any me anin g fu l or

su bs tanti ve se ns e . I f, arguen do , the Ap pe lla nt d id m anif

e st a n “ int e nt” to commit thef

t, the fac ts show an “attempt” only –not a completed theft. Section 15.01(a ), Texas Pe na l Co de , s tate s:

(A) Aperson c ommits an offe nse if, with spe cific intent to commit an offense , he do e s an a c t amo untin g to m or e tha n me repr e pa

ratio n th at te nd s b ut f

a ils to eff ect the c ommissi on of the off ense intende d. The Appe llant, whateve r the intent, fa iled to effe ct the ac t of theft: neither “a cq u i s ition” nor

“ e xer c ise of

c ontr ol” re a c he d c omp le tio n. Th e e nh anc e me nt o f a the ft that w ou ld o the rw ise fa ll into mis demea

nor cla ssification to a State jail Fe lony under 31.03( e)( 4)(D) , Texas Penal Code,BRI EF OF A PPEL L ANT, ROC HEL L E PA GE 5

su pr a , r e qu ir e s a

c omp le te d th e ft . I d. An “ atte mpt ” do e s n ot s uf

fi c e fo r a pp lic ati on

of thi s enhanc ement provision. I d. Thus is the evidence ag ainst Appellant “leg ally insufficient” as that phase i s u n d er s tood in J ackson v. V irg inia, 443 U.S. 307(1979)(r eleva nt question is whether afte r viewingthe evidenc e in the lig ht m o s t favora ble to the prosec ution, any rational trier

of fac t could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a rea sonable doubt). See also: Dricha s v. State, 175 S.W . 3d 795,798 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)(applying Jackson standa rd).

P RAYE R The Appe llant respec tfully reque sts this case be re verse d and dismissed.

Respectf ully submitt ed, __/s/ Cl ement Dunn_______________ 140 East Tyler Stree t, Suit e 240 L ong view, Te x as 75601 (903) 753- 7071 Fax : 903-753-8783 State Ba r No. 06249300CERTIFIC ATE OF SERVICE

Ih er eb y ce rt i fy th ata tru e an d

co rr ec tco p y

o f t h i s b ri ef

wa s d el i v er edt o th e G re gg County District Attorney ’s Off

ice, L ong view, Te x as on this 22 day of De cembe r 2014. nd

__/s/ Cl ement Dunn_______________

CERTIFIC ATE OF WORD C OUNT

Ihere by cer tify that a total of 1548 wor ds are included in this brief.

__/s/ Cl ement Dunn_______________

B RI EF O F APP ELLAN T , RO CH ELLE

PA GE 6