State v. Alvey
2002 La.App. 4 Cir. 1741, 2003 La. App. LEXIS 172, 839 So. 2d 395 (2003)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A defendant's belief that property is abandoned is not a reasonable mistake of fact sufficient to negate the specific intent for theft if the circumstances would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the property was stolen and subsequently abandoned by the thief, not by its legal owner.
Facts:
- Willie Guidry owned a customized 1993 Chevrolet pickup truck which he kept in 'beautiful,' show-quality condition.
- Macy Alvey III knew Guidry through his father, and Guidry testified that Alvey had previously complimented him on the truck.
- On October 16, 2001, Guidry's truck was stolen from his residence.
- The next day, October 17, 2001, police recovered Guidry's truck from a vacant, trash-strewn lot located about one-and-a-half miles from Guidry's home.
- Alvey saw the truck in the lot, which he characterized as a dump site, noting it had grass growing around it and the windows were down.
- Believing the truck was abandoned, Alvey removed the truck bed cover and took it to his home to use on one of his own trucks.
- After learning where his truck was found, Guidry went to Alvey's nearby residence and identified his truck bed cover in Alvey's backyard.
- When confronted by police, Alvey admitted taking the cover but maintained that he believed the truck had been abandoned.
Procedural Posture:
- Macy Alvey III was charged with theft of property valued at five hundred dollars or more in the trial court.
- Alvey pleaded not guilty, and the trial court denied his motion to suppress his statement and the evidence.
- Following a jury trial, Alvey was found guilty of the lesser offense of theft of property valued at three hundred dollars or more but less than five hundred dollars.
- The trial court denied Alvey's motion for a post-verdict judgment of acquittal.
- Alvey pleaded guilty to being a second-felony habitual offender and was sentenced to eighteen months at hard labor.
- Alvey, as appellant, filed a motion for appeal to the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a defendant's belief that a vehicle was abandoned constitute a reasonable mistake of fact sufficient to negate the specific intent required for theft, when circumstances indicate the vehicle was recently stolen and left in a vacant lot?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge James F. McKay III
No. A defendant's belief that property is abandoned does not constitute a reasonable mistake of fact when common sense would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the property was stolen and then abandoned by the thief, not by its legal owner. Theft requires the specific intent to permanently deprive the owner of their property. While a reasonable mistake of fact can be a defense, an unreasonable one cannot. Here, although the truck was found in a dump-like area and was scratched, it was a customized vehicle in 'beautiful' condition just one day prior. The court reasoned that a rational person would conclude the truck was abandoned by a thief, not by its rightful owner. Therefore, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational jury could find that Alvey possessed the requisite specific intent to commit theft.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the application of the mistake of fact defense in theft cases concerning property that appears abandoned. The court's decision emphasizes an objective standard for reasonableness, limiting the ability of a defendant to rely solely on a subjective belief of abandonment. This precedent strengthens the prosecution's position in cases where valuable property is found in suspicious circumstances, as it suggests a finder has a duty to consider whether the item was likely stolen and dumped rather than legally discarded. The ruling makes it more difficult for defendants to successfully argue they lacked criminal intent when taking property under such conditions.
Unlock the full brief for State v. Alvey