≡ Menu

§ 943.32, Armed Robbery – sufficiency of evidence

State v. Keith Jones, 228 Wis.2d 593, 598 N.W.2d 259 (Ct. App. 1999)
For Jones: Edward J. Hunt

Holding: In the course of making their get-away, Jones’s shoplifting codefendant allegedly threatened Shogren, a pursuing guard. Notwithstanding the codefendant’s acquittal, Jones’s conviction for armed robbery is sustained against a sufficiency of evidence challenge.

Here, there was sufficient evidence to convict Jones.  That the jury acquitted Patterson does not necessarily mean that it discounted Shogren’s testimony.  In order to be convicted as party to the crime of armed robbery, Patterson had to have known about the underlying theft of the jeans.  See Wis J I—Criminal 400.  It may be that the jury believed Shogren’s account but did not believe that Patterson knew about the theft.  That would explain a conviction for Jones, who knew about the theft and the alleged threat, but an acquittal for Patterson.  We cannot say that the jury could not have reasonably reached the result it did.  We reject Jones’s insufficient evidence argument.

{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment