Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Riddle v. State

Supreme Court of Wyoming

December 21, 2017

DOROTHY JEAN RIDDLE, Appellant (Defendant),
v.
THE STATE OF WYOMING, Appellee (Plaintiff).

         Appeal from the District Court of Sweetwater County The Honorable Richard L. Lavery, Judge

          Representing Appellant: Office of the State Public Defender: Diane M. Lozano, State Public Defender; Tina N. Olson [*] , Chief Appellate Counsel; Kirk Morgan, Senior Assistant Appellate Counsel; Eric M. Alden, Senior Assistant Appellate Counsel. Argument by Mr. Alden.

          Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Attorney General; David L. Delicath, Deputy Attorney General; Christyne M. Martens, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Adam Leuschel, Assistant Attorney General. Argument by Mr. Leuschel.

          Before BURKE, C.J., and HILL, DAVIS, FOX, and KAUTZ, JJ.

          BURKE, CHIEF JUSTICE.

         [¶1] Appellant, Dorothy Jean Riddle, was convicted of forgery. She challenges that conviction in this appeal. She asserts that there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction under the specific subparagraph of the forgery statute that she was charged with violating. We reverse.

         ISSUE

         [¶2] Was there sufficient evidence to support Ms. Riddle's forgery conviction under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-3-602(a)(ii) (LexisNexis 2013)?

         FACTS

         [¶3] The facts of this case are relatively straightforward and, in large measure, undisputed. Ms. Riddle deposited a $4, 000 check in a joint account that she held with her son, Dalton. The check was written on the account of her mother-in-law, and was made payable to Dalton Riddle. The signature on the check indicated that it had been executed by the mother-in-law.

         [¶4] The mother-in-law learned of the existence of the check when she received an overdraft notice on her account. She notified police that the check had been stolen and that she believed the theft took place while she was out of town. She did not write or sign the check and did not authorize anyone else to write a check for that amount in her name.

         [¶5] During the ensuing investigation, law enforcement reviewed surveillance video from the credit union where the check had been deposited. The video revealed that the deposit was made by Ms. Riddle. She was subsequently arrested and charged with forgery under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-3-602(a)(ii). A jury trial was held and she was found guilty. A subsequent motion for a judgement of acquittal was denied and Ms. Riddle was sentenced to a prison term of four to eight years. That sentence was suspended and she was placed on probation. She filed this timely appeal.

         STANDARD OF REVIEW

         [¶6] When reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim in a criminal case,

[w]e examine and accept as true the State's evidence and all reasonable inferences which can be drawn from it. We do not consider conflicting evidence presented by the defendant. We do not substitute our judgment for that of the jury; rather, we determine whether a jury could have reasonably concluded each of the elements of the crime was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This standard applies whether the supporting evidence is direct or circumstantial.

Bean v. State, 2016 WY 48, ¶ 44, 373 P.3d 372, 386 (Wyo. 2016) (quoting Guerrero v. State, 2012 WY 77, ¶ 14, 277 P.3d 735, 738-39 (Wyo. 2012)).

Mraz v. State, 2016 WY 85, ¶ 18, 378 P.3d 280, 286 (Wyo. 2016). To evaluate the sufficiency of the evidence in this case, however, we must first determine the specific conduct prohibited by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-3-602(a)(ii). "Statutory interpretation raises questions of law, which we review de novo." PacifiCorp, Inc. v. Dep't ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.