Court Opinion

ID: 9521675
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 02:09:45.663648+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:50:05.374838
License: Public Domain

GIVAN, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case. The majority correctly cites authority for the proposition that this Court will not reweigh evidence on appeal. However, that is precisely what the Court then proceeds to do.
Possession of the goods by appellant shortly after the burglary, together with his false explanations of his possession, was ample evidence to support the jury’s finding that he was in fact the person who had acquired the goods through the perpetration of the burglary. The evidence is clear that the burglary was committed, and the goods taken were in the unexplained possession of appellant shortly thereafter.
The trial court should be affirmed.
PIVARNIK, J., concurs.