State v. Van Winkle
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RICHMOND, Judge.
The two issues in this appeal from a conviction of theft of property valued at over $100 are 1) whether there was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict, and 2) whether the court erred in instructing the jury. We affirm.
Appellant contends the evidence was insufficient to prove that he knowingly con*477trolled the property of another without lawful authority and either intended to deprive the owner of the property or knew or had reason to know the property was stolen. A.R.S. § 13-1802(A)(1) and (5). He also argues that the evidence as to the value of the property was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- State v. JonesArizona Supreme Court · 1980
- State v. WareCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. DixonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
- State v. ColeCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
- State v. ColeCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987