Court Opinion

ID: 9675693
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:02:32.937263+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:37.391661
License: Public Domain

TEAGUE, Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the result reached.
However, I believe that the majority’s summary of the facts, regarding the theft of the automobile conviction, is sorely lacking.
In addition to what the majority has stated, I would add the following, which is taken from appellant’s “Argument Brief.”
On April 9, 1979, Officer Pfiel received a call from the Appellant on the telephone. She introduced herself as Tina, who was identified as appellant. Appellant stated that she had a car and wanted to know if the police were interested in purchasing it. Officer Pfiel advised Appellant to bring the vehicle to the shop which the police operated undercover. Approximately two hours later Appellant arrived with a 1966 Plymouth VIP. The vehicle was driven by an individual named John L. King. Another individual known as Willy Green was also present. All three of the individuals entered the shop and Officer Pfiel went out and looked at the vehicle and came back in. The parties then entered into negotiations. When the officers stated that the vehicle was old and would not be worth retitling and could only be used as a load car to transport marijuana, Appellant replied that she understood that and that she might even be interested in doing a little bit of that herself. The officers paid One Hundred and Twenty Five Dollars ($125.00) for the car and the money was picked up by John L. King. The title to the vehicle was in hand, registered to one Roland Duran and the title was given to the officers by John L. King.