DocketNumber: Case No. CA96-11-024.
Judges: WALSH, J.
Filed Date: 8/4/1997
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
Defendant-appellant, Luckie E. Webb, appeals his conviction for burglary, an aggravated felony of the second degree. We affirm.
On Friday, October 13, 1995, at about 3:00 p.m., appellant was working, as he often did, in one of the two garages behind the house of Tom and Virginia Webb. Appellant had known Tom Webb for eighteen years and called him "Uncle Tom." The two shared an interest in car racing and went to the races together. Appellant and Tom Webb worked together on Tom Webb's race cars. Tom Webb also permitted appellant to use the garages to work on other people's cars. Appellant had keys to both garages and a key to Tom Webb's truck. Appellant did not have a key to the Webbs' home. The Webbs kept an extra key on a windowsill at the back of the house, but appellant did not have permission to use that key.
Every Friday evening, the Webbs went out to dinner. On October 13, 1995, they left their house shortly after appellant arrived at about 3:00 p.m. They surprised appellant by returning fifteen minutes later after Virginia Webb realized she had left something at home. Virginia Webb entered the house and then heard footsteps upstairs. She investigated the noise to find appellant crouched behind a china closet in an upstairs "junk room." Appellant told Mrs. Webb that he "thought someone was breaking in and he * * * was trying to hide."
At trial, appellant testified that he had come in the house to use the bathroom. He chose to use the upstairs bathroom instead of the first floor bathroom because he had diarrhea, and the upstairs bathroom had an exhaust fan. Tom Webb testified, however, that there was no fan in the upstairs bathroom. Mrs. Webb testified that she knew appellant had not used the bathroom because the toilet had not been flushed. She had put bleach in the toilets before she left, and it was still there when she found appellant.
After this encounter, the Webbs went out to dinner. When they returned, Mrs. Webb discovered that approximately $1,430 in cash was missing from a box she kept in an upstairs bedroom. Virginia Webb testified that she had seen the money in the box a few days before.
Appellant was indicted on a charge of burglary in violation of R.C.
Appellant presents two assignments of error for review. In the first assignment, appellant states that the trial court erred to his prejudice by denying his motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds.
Section
Appellant was arrested on December 21, 1995 and held in the Fayette County Jail until December 29, 1995. The pretrial hearing, initially scheduled for February 6, 1996, was continued until March 8, 1996, to accommodate appellant's counsel. On March 5, 1996, appellant's counsel withdrew. New counsel was appointed on March 11, 1996, and the pretrial hearing was rescheduled for March 18, 1996. The trial was set for October 4, 1996. The trial was then postponed until October 16, 1996 when Virginia Webb, the state's primary witness, became ill.
Our calculations for speedy trial purposes are as follows: From December 21, 1995 until December 29, 1995, appellant is credited with twenty-four days (eight actual days times three). See R.C.
In the second assignment of error, appellant argues that the jury verdict convicting him of burglary is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. We disagree.
An appellate court's function in reviewing the weight of the evidence supporting a criminal conviction is to "review the entire record, weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider the credibility of witnesses and determine whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered." State v. Thompkins (1997),
R.C.
When Virginia Webb returned to her home in the late afternoon of October 13, 1995, she found appellant hiding behind a cupboard in an upstairs bedroom. Appellant entered the house when he knew the Webbs were not home by using a key the Webbs kept on a windowsill. Appellant did not have permission to be in the Webb home when the Webbs were not there. Appellant did not have his own key to the house, nor did he have permission to enter the house using the spare key. Appellant's stated reasons for being in the house at all, and upstairs in particular, were in direct conflict with the Webbs' testimony. Appellant claimed he was in the house to use the toilet, and that he went upstairs because there was an exhaust fan there. The evidence showed, however, that appellant had not used the bathroom, and that there was no exhaust fan upstairs. Finally, shortly after Virginia Webb found appellant hiding in her house, she discovered $1,430 in cash missing from a nearby room.
From these facts, we find that a jury could conclude that appellant trespassed in the Webb's home using "stealth, or deception" with the "purpose of committing a theft offense or a felony." See R.C. 2911.129 (A)(1). There is ample evidence to support appellant's conviction. The second assignment of error is overruled. The judgment is affirmed.
YOUNG, P.J., and KOEHLER, J., concur.
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE MARKER FOR FOOTNOTE 1 IS OMITTED FROM THE OFFICIAL COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT, THEREFORE THE MARKER IS NOT DISPLAYED IN THE ONLINE VERSION.]
R.C.
"Occupied structure" means any house, building * * * or any portion thereof, to which any of the following applies:
(1) It is maintained as a permanent or temporary dwelling, even though it is temporarily unoccupied and whether or not any person is actually present.
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE MARKER FOR FOOTNOTE 2 IS OMITTED FROM THE OFFICIAL COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT, THEREFORE THE MARKER IS NOT DISPLAYED IN THE ONLINE VERSION.]