Court Opinion

ID: 9698632
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:56:17.049126+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:42.451577
License: Public Domain

Caporale, J.,
dissenting in part.
I agree with the majority’s conclusion that Victor Schaaf is guilty of theft, but that the value of the property stolen and for which he stands convicted is only $3,500, not $404,504 as found by the trial court.
My difficulty is that I cannot help but also conclude, notwithstanding the fact that any theft of over $1,000 is a Class III felony, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-518(1) (Reissue 1985), that reducing the amount of the theft by $401,004 significantly alters one of the bases the trial court presumably considered in imposing its sentence. See State v. Richter, 220 Neb. 551, 371 *163N.W.2d 125 (1985) (nature of the offense one of factors to be considered in determining appropriate sentence).
I am not unmindful that notwithstanding the fact the additional $401,004 cannot be considered in resolving the issue of Schaaf’s guilt, it could nonetheless be considered in determining an appropriate sentence. State v. Jordan, 229 Neb. 563, 427 N.W.2d 796 (1988). It therefore may well be that the trial court would impose the same sentence even in the face of the altered basis of Schaaf’s conviction. The problem is that we do not know that such would have been the case; it therefore seems to me that Schaaf ought to have the opportunity to address that issue with the court which has the initial responsibility of exercising its discretion'in determining an appropriate sentence.
Accordingly, I would affirm the conviction but remand the cause to the district court for resentencing.