Opinion ID: 588107
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Sufficiency of Evidence of Ownership of Prints

Text: 21 Grant challenges the sufficiency of the government's evidence that the Stobart prints were property belonging to [his chapter 7] estate, within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 152, clause 1. 9 The present contention reduces to the basic proposition that particular elements of the prosecution's case, viewed in isolation, were inconclusive on the issue of the ownership of the Stobart prints. 10 Of course we review the evidence as a whole and in context, not in piecemeal isolation. United States v. Geer, 923 F.2d 892, 894 (1st Cir.1991) (per curiam); United States v. Kaplan, 832 F.2d 676, 679 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 907, 108 S.Ct. 1080, 99 L.Ed.2d 239 (1987). The determination whether a debtor held a legal, equitable, or possessory interest in property at the commencement of the case requires the fact-finder to evaluate all relevant direct and circumstantial evidence relating to the property and to the intent of the debtor. See, e.g., Provencher v. Berman, 699 F.2d 568, 572-73 (1st Cir.1983) (fact-finder considers evidence relating to such criteria as the source of funds, donative intent); accord In re Sommer, 28 B.R. 95, 95-97 (Bankr.D.Colo.1983) (relevant factors may include the source of funds used to acquire the property, the record title, actual possession, intent of purchaser, payment of taxes, and maintenance of the property). 22 The government introduced evidence that (1) Grant signed most of the invoices as the purchaser, 11 (2) a Summit employee represented to its insurer that the Stobart prints were owned by Grant, (3) at least two prints were stored in the Grant residence, (4) Grant's chapter 11 schedules listed 15 prints & photographs ... located at 92 State Street as his personal property, 12 and (5) during the chapter 7 proceedings, Grant testified under oath that the Stobart prints belonged to him. 13 23 Our review of a criminal defendant's challenge to an unfavorable jury verdict allegedly based on insufficient evidence is a deferential one: 24 We assess the sufficiency of the evidence as a whole, including all reasonable inferences, in the light most favorable to the verdict, with a view to whether a rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. We do not weigh witness credibility, but resolve all credibility issues in favor of the verdict. The evidence may be entirely circumstantial and need not exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; that is, the factfinder may decide among reasonable interpretations of the evidence. 25 United States v. Lopez, 944 F.2d 33, 39 (1st Cir.1991) (quoting United States v. Batista-Polanco, 927 F.2d 14, 17 (1st Cir.1991)). Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, there was ample evidence that Grant acquired at least six Stobart prints in his own right, maintained them as his own, and well knew at the time of their removal that the prints belonged to his chapter 7 estate.