Scott v. State

A jury found Arnold Vincent Scott, Jr. guilty of theft by deception. Scott appeals, alleging the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict or motion for new trial because the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict and the trial court erred in its charge to the jury. We find no error and affirm Scott’s conviction. 1. On appeal from a criminal conviction, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to support the jury’s verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys a presumption of innocence; moreover, this Court determines evidence sufficiency and does not weigh the evidence or determine witness credibility.1 “Resolving evidentiary conflicts and inconsistencies, and assessing witness credibility, are the province of the factfinder, not this Court.”2 As long as there is some evidence, even though contradicted, to support each necessary element of the state’s case, this Court will uphold the jury’s verdict.3

Viewed in this light, the evidence shows that Scott used his father’s social security number in order to obtain a check from RoadLoans.com and buy a 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee from Team Chrysler. During August and September of 2003, Scott expressed his interest in obtaining the 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee to Team Chrysler’s General Sales Manager Posey Grier. Scott filled out a credit application through Team Chrysler, using his own social security number on the application. Team Chrysler’s creditors rejected Scott’s application as too risky.