State of Tennessee v. Brandon Mccaslin

Citation: Not availableDocket: W2004-02539-CCA-R3-CD

Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee; November 30, 2010; Tennessee; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Brandon McCaslin was convicted by a jury of two counts of theft of property over $1,000, classified as Class D felonies, and sentenced to four years of confinement as a Range II multiple offender. The case arose from incidents on January 9, 2004, where McCaslin and his co-defendant stole forty-seven rings from two jewelry stores in Dyersburg. They were apprehended the same day, aided by a surveillance video that captured the theft. McCaslin opted for a trial after his co-defendant pleaded guilty.

During the trial, evidence demonstrated that McCaslin drove himself and his co-defendant to the jewelry stores, where the co-defendant stole trays of rings while McCaslin distracted the attendants. They subsequently attempted to sell stolen rings at pawn shops, but their activities were reported to the police, leading to their capture when found hiding in McCaslin's mother's house. McCaslin admitted to police that additional stolen rings were concealed there.

Witnesses, including store employees, provided testimony about the thefts and the stolen property, with one confirming the value exceeded $1,000. Although one employee could not positively identify McCaslin at trial, descriptions of the suspects and the surveillance footage contributed to the evidence against him. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgments, rejecting McCaslin's claim of insufficient evidence for his convictions.

Mr. Wilbanks discovered three trays containing thirty-five rings, valued at $17,881, missing after a day of business. Surveillance footage revealed Mr. Doss removing the trays from the jewelry case and placing them in the Defendant's Jeep. Wilbanks reported the theft to the police and provided the surveillance video. Bennie Patterson, owner of City Pawn Shop, received a call from the police about the stolen jewelry and became suspicious when Crystal Custer attempted to sell him new rings shortly thereafter. Custer left the rings at the shop and drove off in a white Jeep with the Defendant. 

Officer Chris Hamm investigated the theft and alerted local pawn shops to be vigilant for the stolen rings. Despite recovering two rings from Patterson's shop, they did not match those stolen from Wilbanks. Officer Jim Joyner, responding to another theft report, coordinated with Hamm after realizing the connections between the cases. 

The Defendant's Jeep was located near his mother's house, where police monitored the area. After obtaining permission from the Defendant's mother to enter the residence, police found the Defendant and Doss hiding inside. During separate interviews, the Defendant admitted to being present during the theft but denied involvement in taking the rings. He also indicated that more stolen rings were concealed under his mother's bathroom sink. Custer testified that she assisted Doss in pawning rings in Missouri, handing over the proceeds to him.

Ms. Custer pawned a ring in Dyersburg and later at the City Pawn Shop, where the attendant suspected foul play and called the police. Upon leaving the store, Ms. Custer asked the Defendant and Mr. Doss if the rings were stolen; they confirmed they were, claiming the theft occurred in Jackson. Ms. Custer insisted the Defendant drive her home, where he gave her four or five rings for safekeeping. The next day, she learned the Defendant and Mr. Doss had been arrested for stealing from local jewelry stores and subsequently called the police, who retrieved the rings from her. On the following Monday, she provided a statement to investigators. After giving the rings to the police, the Defendant, out on bail, visited her asking for the rings, but she claimed to have given them to a friend. The Defendant alleged he had distracted store clerks while Mr. Doss stole the rings, asserting that Mr. Doss would take full responsibility due to his prior parole violations. During cross-examination, Ms. Custer acknowledged being initially charged but had her charges dropped in exchange for her testimony against the Defendant. She was also on probation for a previous theft.

Mr. Doss, the defense witness, testified that he was incarcerated for parole violations and theft connected to the same incident. He recounted stealing rings from Jones Jewelry and the Diamond Gallery, claiming he took trays of rings while the Defendant continued shopping. Mr. Doss stated he did not inform the Defendant about the thefts until after they left the Diamond Gallery. After the theft, they visited the Defendant’s mother’s house to hide the rings and later involved Ms. Custer in pawning some of them. He denied ever giving any rings or proceeds from their sale to the Defendant, and described a post-theft evening spent using drugs and alcohol before their arrest.

Mr. Doss testified that the Defendant benefited from the theft only by potentially using money from pawning stolen rings to buy drugs. During cross-examination, Doss could not reconcile his statement that he and the Defendant walked from a nearby pet store with surveillance footage showing their arrival in the Defendant's Jeep. Doss acknowledged a prior criminal incident involving both individuals in 2000, where he was convicted of car theft and the Defendant for joyriding. The Defendant did not testify, and he was ultimately convicted of two counts of theft of property over $1,000, classified as a Class D felony. 

On appeal, the Defendant contends that there is insufficient evidence to support his convictions, claiming he never exercised control over the stolen rings after they were taken by Doss. Under Tennessee law, the appellate court will overturn a verdict only if no rational trier of fact could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden rests on the Defendant to demonstrate the insufficiency of the evidence, as a guilty verdict implies a presumption of guilt. The appellate court must view the evidence favorably to the prosecution and accept all reasonable inferences drawn from it. 

The elements of theft include knowingly obtaining or exercising control over property with the intent to deprive the owner, without effective consent. For property valued between $1,000 and $10,000, the crime is classified as a Class D felony. The Defendant's argument hinges on the lack of testimony from State witnesses regarding his acquisition of the stolen rings, asserting that Doss was the one who physically took them.

The Defendant argues he did not control the stolen rings or the money from their sale, citing Mr. Doss's testimony for support. However, the evidence substantiates the Defendant's convictions for theft, based on his exercise of control over stolen property and criminal responsibility for another's conduct. The law in Tennessee allows for a theft conviction if a person either takes property without consent or exercises control over it with intent to deprive the owner, as established in State v. Byrd. In this case, although the Defendant did not personally take the rings, evidence revealed he knowingly exercised control over them without the owner's consent, intending to deprive the owner. Testimony indicates the Defendant gave rings to Ms. Custer and attempted to retrieve them after his arrest. While Mr. Doss disputed this account, credibility determinations are reserved for the jury. The Court has previously equated exercising control with constructive possession, which can apply to theft cases. The record shows witnesses confirmed the Defendant's knowledge of the rings' theft and his actions to sell them at multiple pawn shops across two states. In theft cases, criminal intent can be inferred from circumstantial evidence, particularly when based on exercising control over stolen property.

The Defendant claims he had no control over the stolen property and argues that Mr. Doss should bear sole responsibility for the thefts. However, evidence suggests otherwise; the Defendant's act of hiding under a mattress when police arrived implies guilt, as established in Sotka v. State, where evasion of arrest is relevant to inferring guilt. Additionally, the stolen rings were found at the Defendant's mother’s house, supporting an inference of guilt based on possession of recently stolen property, as noted in State v. Hatchett. The evidence presented at trial was sufficient for a rational jury to conclude that the Defendant exercised control over the stolen rings with intent to deprive the owner.

Tennessee law holds individuals criminally responsible for offenses committed by another if they act to promote or assist the crime. This concept, rooted in common law, is not a separate offense but a means to prove guilt based on another's actions. A defendant's presence and association with the perpetrator can imply participation, without the need for a specific act or physical involvement, as per State v. Caldwell. In this case, the Defendant drove Mr. Doss to the jewelry stores, aided in selling the stolen rings, and was found hiding with Mr. Doss. Furthermore, he admitted to distracting store clerks during the theft. Thus, the Defendant's ongoing association and assistance in the crime make him criminally responsible for the thefts. The evidence supports the jury’s verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the Defendant has not demonstrated insufficient evidence. The court affirms the trial court's judgments.