Opinion
No. 35293-1-II.
August 14, 2007.
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Lewis County, No. 05-1-00746-4, Scott E. Blinks, J. Pro Tem., entered August 23, 2006.
Affirmed by unpublished opinion per Houghton, C.J., concurred in by Bridgewater and Hunt, JJ.
Denise Griffith appeals her conviction of second degree possession of stolen property, arguing that insufficient evidence supported her conviction. We affirm.
FACTS
Two men entered Griffith's home on or about June 27, 2005, and asked if they could borrow her vehicle. They later returned with 5 to 15 computers. Upon seeing them, Griffith's daughter told her mother, "those are Toledo High School computers." Report of Proceedings (June 1, 2006) (RP) at 72. Then, as the two men booted up these computers, "Toledo High School" flashed on the computer screens. RP at 41. The computers also had "Toledo High School" identified above the bar code stickers. RP at 63.
After booting a computer, one of the men asked Griffith's daughter for her high school "code." RP at 45-46. At one point, Griffith called her daughter into the living room and asked her if she knew the password for the computers.
Later, Griffith let the men borrow her car a second time and they came back with several more computers. After dinner, the men loaded up the computers from Griffith's house and she followed them in her own car.
On August 2, Griffith's daughter reported the stolen computers to the police and a detective contacted Griffith. Griffith admitted to the detective that she knew the computers were from Toledo High School because the screens read "Toledo High School." RP at 77. The police then seized the computers from her home.
The jury convicted Griffith of second degree possession of stolen property, a lesser crime than the one charged, RCW 9A.56.160. She appeals.
The jury also convicted Griffith of bail jumping, but she does not appeal that conviction.
ANALYSIS
Griffith contends that insufficient evidence supports her conviction. More specifically, she asserts that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew she possessed stolen computers.
The standard of review for "determining the sufficiency of the evidence is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, any rational trier of fact could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Salinas, 119 Wn.2d 192, 201, 829 P.23 1068, 1074 (1992).
According to RCW 9A.56.160(1), "A person is guilty of possessing stolen property in the second degree if: (a) He or she possesses stolen property other than a firearm as defined in RCW 9.41.010 which exceeds two hundred fifty dollars in value but does not exceed one thousand five hundred dollars in value."
"To convict a defendant of possession of stolen property in the second degree, the State must prove that the defendant possessed the property, that the property was in fact stolen, and that the defendant knew the property was stolen." State v. Plank, 46 Wn. App. 728, 731, 731 P.2d 1170 (1987).
"Although bare possession of recently stolen property will not support the assumption that a person knew the property was stolen, that fact plus slight corroborative evidence of other inculpatory circumstances tending to show guilt will support a conviction." State v. Ford, 33 Wash.App. 788, 790, 658 P.2d 36 (1983).
Sufficient evidence shows that Griffith knew that the computers were stolen. First, when the two men arrived at her home with the computers, Griffith's daughter told her that the computers belonged to Toledo High School. Second, the monitors displayed the Toledo High School logo after boot up and Toledo High School appeared above the bar code stickers. Third, Griffith asked her daughter for the password to the computers, knowing that she attended Toledo High School. Fourth, Griffith then let the two men borrow her vehicle a second time and they brought more computers into her home. Fifth, Griffith followed the men home with both vehicles loaded with computers. Finally, Griffith also kept some of the computers in her home and admitted to the detective that she knew they belonged to Toledo High School.
This substantial evidence shows that Griffith knowingly possessed stolen property. Her sufficiency argument fails.
Affirmed.
A majority of the panel having determined that this opinion will not be printed in the Washington Appellate Reports, but will be filed for public record pursuant to RCW 2.06.040, it is so ordered.
BRIDGEWATER, J., HUNT, J. concur