Court Opinion

ID: 9674307
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:26:20.014162+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:11:31.550146
License: Public Domain

DONNELLY, Judge
(dissenting).
I would apply the following rules to the facts in this case:
(1) A recent, unexplained, and exclusive possession of stolen property will support an inference of the guilt of the possessor.
(2) To “create an inference of guilt, the term ‘exclusive’ does not mean that the possession must be separate from all others * * State v. Oliver, 355 Mo. 173, 176, 195 S.W.2d 484, 486.
(3) However, in situations where joint possession is claimed, there must be other evidence to connect defendant with the offense. State v. Oliver, supra; State v. Crawford, 59 Utah 39, 201 P. 1030.
In my opinion, the “other evidence” adduced in this case is not sufficient to show defendant participated in the burglary.
I respectfully dissent.
SEILER, J., concurs.