Marriott v. State

The evidence supported the defendant's convictions for theft by receiving and theft by deception after she stole her father's guns and sold them.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Shane Elizabeth Marriott was tried by a Hall County jury and convicted of five counts of theft by receiving stolen property1 and one count of theft by deception.2 She now appeals from the denial of her motion for a new trial, asserting that the evidence was insufficient to sustain her convictions for theft by receiving. Marriott further contends that the trial court committed plain error in instructing the jury on the elements of theft by receiving and in refusing to instruct the jury as to her sole defense on the charge of theft by deception. We find no reversible error and affirm.

On appeal from a criminal conviction, the defendant is no longer entitled to a presumption of innocence and we therefore construe the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s guilty verdict. Martinez v. State, 306 Ga. App. 512, 514 702 SE2d 747 2010. So viewed, the record shows that on either June 4 or June 5, 2009, Marriott’s parents contacted the Hall County Sherriff’s Department and reported a burglary at their home. Specifically, Marriott’s father told the responding officer that a number of guns were missing from his gun closet. The father subsequently told the investigator assigned to the case that he suspected his daughter, Marriott, had stolen the guns. His suspicions were based on the facts that Marriott and her parents were not on good terms at the time, that Marriott had a key to the house, and that she was the only person other than her father who knew where he kept the key to the gun closet. Additionally, on the day they discovered the guns missing, the parents had been contacted by their next-door neighbor who reported that she had seen a car resembling Marriott’s parked in the parents’ driveway while they were gone from the house. Marriott’s father testified to the foregoing facts at trial, and also stated that he had neither given Marriott any of his guns nor permission to sell any of them.

Marriott v. State

The evidence supported the defendant's convictions for theft by receiving and theft by deception after she stole her father's guns and sold them.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report