Court Opinion

ID: 9538363
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 07:35:45.343236+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:48.371009
License: Public Domain

WILKINS, Justice
(Concurring with comments).
I concur that this case should be remanded to the District Court for entry of judgment of not guilty for the reason that the State has failed to present any evidence that the defendant knew “. . . that it (the van) has been stolen, or believing that it probably has been stolen . . .,” Section 76-6-408(1), Utah Code Annotated, 1953, as amended.
The stipulation made by the prosecution and defense counsel that the van had been “missing” for three days does not, in my view, rise at all to an evidentiary level in this case from which reasonable men and women of the jury could conclude guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on this essential element of the crime charged here.