Opinion ID: 2540012
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Operability of the Firearm

Text: Appellant next argues that the Commonwealth failed to present evidence that he was armed with an operable deadly weapon; thus, the court should have directed a verdict on both first-degree robbery charges. Appellant notes that robbery in the first degree requires that the defendant was armed with a deadly weapon. KRS 515.020(1)(b). Deadly weapon is statutorily defined as, any weapon from which a shot, readily capable of producing death or other serious physical injury, may be discharged. KRS 500.080(4)(b). Appellant alleges that the Commonwealth failed to prove that he possessed a deadly weapon when he robbed Speedway and River City Bank, by neglecting to introduce evidence of the operability of the weapon. Consequently, Appellant asserts that the Commonwealth failed to prove every element of robbery in the first-degree beyond a reasonable doubt, a violation of his due process rights. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 316, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). We disagree. When evaluating a motion for directed verdict on appeal, the test of a directed verdict is, if under the evidence as a whole, it would be clearly unreasonable for a jury to find guilt, only then the defendant is entitled to a directed verdict of acquittal. Commonwealth v. Benham, 816 S.W.2d 186, 188 (1991). With that standard in mind, we turn to Appellant's argument. For decades, this Court has grappled with the statutory language relating to the operability of a deadly weapon. Although the operability requirement is currently somewhat in flux, we have never held that the firearm must be operable at the time of the robbery in order for the firearm to satisfy the deadly weapon requirement. Most recently, this Court splintered in Wilburn v. Commonwealth, with the plurality holding that the Commonwealth satisfies the deadly weapon language of KRS 500.080(4)(b) by showing that the weapon used in the robbery was in the class of weapons which may discharge a shot that is readily capable of producing death or serious physical injury. 312 S.W.3d 321, 329 (Ky.2010). Furthermore, the plurality noted that the victim's description of the item will ordinarily provide sufficient evidence to permit the jury to decide whether it was among the items the legislature defined as a deadly weapon. Id. However, the plurality cautioned that an unseen and unknown item or an item the witness clearly recognizes as a toy, does not qualify as a deadly weapon. Id. With this view in mind, our review of the record reveals that the Commonwealth produced sufficient evidence to prove Appellant was armed with a deadly weapon when he robbed Speedway and River City Bank. As stated in Wilburn, victim testimony describing the object used by the defendant ordinarily provides sufficient evidence to allow the jury to decide whether the object falls within the class of objects the legislature characterizes as deadly weapons. Id. Here, the Commonwealth presented the testimony of four victims, each of whom was either robbed at gun point by Appellant or situated closely thereto. Tonya Brown, the clerk at Speedway, testified that Appellant approached the checkout counter to pay for a soft drink. Before Appellant left, he drew a real silver and black firearm and demanded money from the cash register, all while holding the gun two inches from Brown's face. This testimony established that Brown saw the gun, recognized it as real, and described it as such. Therefore, we find that the Commonwealth introduced sufficient evidence to permit the jury to decide whether Appellant possessed a deadly weapon in connection with the Speedway robbery. Megan Walker, a teller at River City Bank, testified that Appellant entered the bank, requested change for $100, and inquired about opening an account. Appellant turned as if to leave, but suddenly spun, drew a firearm, and ordered Walker to hand over the money. Walker testified that Appellant possessed a black gun. Two other River City Bank employees also witnessed this armed robbery. Josh Lightle testified that Appellant entered the bank and discussed opening an account, drew a gun from his person, and demanded money from the teller. Alisa Wilkins testified that she observed Appellant approach Walker's window and after some discussion, draw a real silver semi-automatic pistol. We find that the testimony of these three witnesses, describing Appellant's possession of a real silver or black, semi-automatic handgun, provided sufficient evidence for the jury to decide whether the Appellant was armed with a deadly weapon when he robbed River City Bank. Consequently, we hold that the trial court did not err by denying Appellant's motion for a directed verdict, as we are unable to find that under the evidence as a whole, it [was] clearly unreasonable for [the] jury to find guilt. Benham, 816 S.W.2d at 187.