Seaton v. State

URBIGKIT, Chief Justice.

Appellant, Kathleen Seaton, seeks reversal of her larceny conviction under W.S. 6-3-402(b).1 She argues the district court erred in failing to instruct the jury with specificity on the subject of circumstantial evidence and that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction.

We affirm the conviction on those issues. On our own motion, we have reviewed the judgment and sentence of the district court and find it necessary to strike those portions relating to assessed costs and monetary penalties which cannot be sustained by the record on appeal.

I

FACTS

Seaton was…