WPC; kkHc9P4y hrn.6bHćb _O(oK\1 ڋEF1* cR7[ E+W{oL w'T]AcC  i]LէY֏,voD\^M.A,7 ,PG硐G 3"0#z,vMlԮ]@{ Z}ZBpvG΋RٰD~aMc~Dn 0C7KLRj_G,5b?r$kc?m zE>~ux`'ܔ|gH yo Ӿ6ũlGg`Tr@>С"QyqSŝ*C4*0ԑtt>Dqm]Oӹս#9U!;]•;}Pőe!plbVC0Y# F U :Q % 0 w 4  0 U: 0D0ce  U:nU:<U:T!!%U:('b'U: )G)U:*,+ B,U:,4-U:<1v1U:Q3U:313U:77 D3080808 0c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8c8 AO:V:V: 0D; D/`; B;HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLJ,  AZ"Arial RegularX(`zZ$TRY,3' Letter3'3' Letter3'T  EDEUE{eeD  H  DӀf|$x3|x((2u$ zZ!TRY3' Letter3' 3'&Avery 8163 Shipping3'T   40XX   0  ,  AZ"Arial Regular(#$  0   & a$  4&XX   3    Thefollowingcaseshaveaddressedsimilarissuesunderthepriorstatutoryscheme:  Statev.Goins,705S.W.2d648(Tenn.1986)(interpretingTenn.CodeAnn.3931112);  Williamsv.State,390S.W.2d234(Tenn.1956)(addressingTenn.CodeAnn.394217);Nelson  v.Gann,344S.W.2d540(Tenn.1960)(decidingembezzlementissueunderTenn.CodeAnn. ` X 394228);Statev.O'Guin,641S.W.2d894(Tenn.Cr.App.1982)(concerningTenn.CodeAnn. (  394224);Shellv.State,584S.W.2d231(Tenn.Crim.App.1979)(aggregatingunderTenn.   CodeAnn.394225).Whilethesecasesareinstructive,theyarenotbindingonthenarrowissueofwhethertheindictmentnowbeforeusimproperlyaggregatedtheftsunderTenn.CodeAnn.3913103(Repl.1991).  XXXXXX   Ad FILEDXX   April27,1998  CecilCrowson,Jr.0XXAppellateCourtClerk ,cAZ"Arial Regular  a$  4&&XX   2    Theindictmentread,inpertinentpart:  8 [Thedefendant]didunlawfully,feloniouslyandknowinglyobtainorexercisecontroloverthefollowingproperty:One(1)purse,thepropertyofBannerHouse,Inc.;cologneandotherproperty,ownedbyPrestigeFragrance;Twowatches,ownedbySwank;Clothes,ownedbyJ.Crew,Inc.;clothesownedbytheCloset,Inc.;one(1)Jacket,thepropertyofWoolrichFactoryOutlet,Inc.;miscellaneousproperty,ownedbyChristmas&Gifts,Inc.;clothesownedbyGaltSands,Inc.;Blankets,ownedbytheGiftGallery,Inc.,inalltheaforesaidpropertyhavinganaggregatevalueinexcessof$1,000.00,thesaiddefendanthavingobtainedorexercisedcontroloverthepropertywithouttheeffectiveconsentofthepropertyowner,andwiththeintenttodeprivetheaforesaidowneroftheirproperty,...   u$  40XX   1    OralargumentwasheardinthiscaseonNovember21,1997,inKingsport,Sullivan  County,Tennessee,aspartofthisCourtsS.C.A.L.E.S.( S upreme C ourt A dvancing L egal |t  E ducationfor S tudents)project. d $  4XX=3Xdd=   2    Thefollowingcaseshaveaddressedsimilarissuesunderthepriorstatutoryscheme:  Statev.Goins,705S.W.2d648(Tenn.1986)(interpretingTenn.CodeAnn.3931112);  Williamsv.State,390S.W.2d234(Tenn.1956)(addressingTenn.CodeAnn.394217);Nelson  v.Gann,344S.W.2d540(Tenn.1960)(decidingembezzlementissueunderTenn.CodeAnn. ` X 394228);Statev.O'Guin,641S.W.2d894(Tenn.Cr.App.1982)(concerningTenn.CodeAnn. (  394224);Shellv.State,584S.W.2d231(Tenn.Crim.App.1979)(aggregatingunderTenn.Code   Ann.394225).Whilethesecasesareinstructive,theyarenotbindingonthenarrowissueofwhethertheindictmentnowbeforeusimproperlyaggregatedtheftsunderTenn.CodeAnn.3913103(Repl.1991).,  AZ"Arial Regular  R$  4pXX=Xdd=   1    XXpOralargumentwasheardinthiscaseonNovember21,1997,in  Kingsport,SullivanCounty,Tennessee,aspartofthisCourtsS.C.A.L.E.S.( S upreme C ourt A dvancing L egal E ducationfor S tudents)project.#pXX#,  AZ"Arial Regular  a$  4&XX   2    Theindictmentread,inpertinentpart:  8 [Thedefendant]didunlawfully,feloniouslyandknowinglyobtainorexercisecontroloverthefollowingproperty:One(1)purse,thepropertyofBannerHouse,Inc.;cologneandotherproperty,ownedbyPrestigeFragrance;Twowatches,ownedbySwank;Clothes,ownedbyJ.Crew,Inc.;clothesownedbytheCloset,Inc.;one(1)Jacket,thepropertyofWoolrichFactoryOutlet,Inc.;miscellaneousproperty,ownedbyChristmas&Gifts,Inc.;clothesownedbyGaltSands,Inc.;Blankets,ownedbytheGiftGallery,Inc.,inalltheaforesaidpropertyhavinganaggregatevalueinexcessof$1,000.00,thesaiddefendanthavingobtainedorexercisedcontroloverthepropertywithouttheeffectiveconsentofthepropertyowner,andwiththeintenttodeprivetheaforesaidowneroftheirproperty,...  Z$  4XX   2    Theindictmentread,inpertinenantpart:  8 didunlawfully,feloniouslyandknowinglyobtainorexercisecontroloverthefollowingproperty...inalltheaforesaidpropertyhavinganaggregatevalueinexcessof$1,000.00...,  AZ"Arial Regular  Z$  4XX   2    Theindictmentread,inpertinenantpart:  8 [Thedefendant]didunlawfully,feloniouslyandknowinglyobtainorexercisecontroloverthefollowingproperty...inalltheaforesaidpropertyhavinganaggregatevalueinexcessof$1,000.00...,  AZ"Arial Regular  Z$  4XX   2    Theindictmentread,inpertinenantpart:  8 [Thedefendant]didunlawfully,feloniouslyandknowinglyobtainorexercisecontroloverthefollowingproperty...inalltheaforesaidpropertyhavinganaggregatevalueinexcessof$1,000.00...,  AZ"Arial Regular  Z$  4!`XX   2    Theindictmentread,inpertinenantpart:  8 [Thedefendant]didunlawfully,feloniouslyandknowinglyobtainorexercisecontroloverthefollowingproperty...inalltheaforesaidpropertyhavinganaggregatevalueinexcessof$1,000.00...  d,  AZ"Arial Regular  Z$  4#`XX   2    Theindictmentread,inpertinenantpart:  8 [Thedefendant]didunlawfully,feloniouslyandknowinglyobtainorexercisecontroloverthefollowingproperty:One(1)purse,thepropertyofBannerHouse,Inc.;cologneandotherproperty,ownedbyPrestigeFragrance;Twowatches,ownedbySwank;Clothes,ownedbyJ.Crew,Inc.;clothesownedbytheCloset,Inc.;one(1)Jacket,thepropertyofWoolrichFactoryOutles,Inc.;miscellaneousproperty,ownedbyChristmas&Gifts,Inc.;clothesownedbyGaltSands,Inc.;Blankets,ownedbytheGiftGallery,Inc.,inalltheaforesaidpropertyhavinganaggregatevalueinexcessof$1,000.00,thesaiddefendanthavingobtainedorexcercisedcontroloverthepropertywithouttheeffectiveconsentofthepropertyowner,andwiththeintenttodeprivetheaforesaidowneroftheirproperty,... ,  AZ"Arial Regular  $  4%XX   1    %X96XOralargumentwasheardinthiscaseonNovember21,1997,in  Kingsport,SullivanCounty,Tennessee,aspartofthisCourtsS.C.A.L.E.S.( S upreme C ourt A dvancing L egal E ducationfor S tudents)project.#%XX96#,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular ' a$  4(&XX   3    Thefollowingcaseshaveaddressedsimilarissuesunderthepriorstatutoryscheme:  Statev.Goins,705S.W.2d648(Tenn.1986)(interpretingTenn.CodeAnn.3931112);  Williamsv.State,390S.W.2d234(Tenn.1956)(addressingTenn.CodeAnn.394217);Nelson  v.Gann,344S.W.2d540(Tenn.1960)(decidingembezzlementissueunderTenn.CodeAnn. ` X 394228);Statev.O'Guin,641S.W.2d894(Tenn.Cr.App.1982)(concerningTenn.CodeAnn. (  394224);Shellv.State,584S.W.2d231(Tenn.Crim.App.1979)(aggregatingunderTenn.Code   Ann.394225).Whilethesecasesareinstructive,theyarenotbindingonthenarrowissueofwhethertheindictmentnowbeforeusimproperlyaggregatedtheftsunderTenn.CodeAnn.3913103(Repl.1991).,  AZ"Arial Regular 'dxd(|3$ zZ!TRY3' Letter3' 3'&Avery 8163 Shipping3'T   -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd zZ!TRY3' Letter3' 3'&Avery 8163 Shipping3'T   4TR[A'Legal RedY3' LetterA' Legal 3'&Avery 8163 ShippingT  7XXdd7   =XXdd=0XX"*US \\ (:!&)*  March25,1998!  :.X HH:\IB013S2\OPINION\BYRD\BYRDBARB.OPNXH:\IB013S2\OPINION\BYRD\BYRDBARB.OPN/  #XX0# r*<,(j 8` `@E ` ttx$, rߛ@PPDINTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  @ii)DATKNOXVILLE@%D(HEARDATKINGSPORT)   <      D   FORPUBLICATION    <      D   Filed: 򀀀AprilApril 2  0 7 ,  13, 1998T$T$MT$ @8  STATEOFTENNESSEE,@##/D)  @##/D) APPELLEE,@##/D)  SEVIERCRIMINAL vn @##/D)v.@##/D)  Hon.RexHenryOgle,Judge B: @##/D)BARBARABYRD,@##/D)  No.03S019705CR00057  @##/D) APPELLANT.@##/D)  &{g&XXFORAPPELLANT: <      D FORAPPELLEE: # EDWARDC.MILLER     D JOHNKNOXWALKUP $! PUBLICDEFENDER <      D ATTORNEYGENERALANDREPORTER ~%v" DANDRIDGE   <      D MICHAELJ.FAHEYII   <      D ASSISTANTATTORNEYGENERAL   <      D NASHVILLEXX&&{g@ss)D ^XXOPINION #XX^a #Ԉ 1*0 ̜COURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSAFFIRMED  CT$HOLDER,J.  817`   X XXX@,D OPINION    #XX X X # Wegrantedthisappealtoaddressthevalidityofanindictmentthat   aggregates,underTenn.CodeAnn.3914103,thevalueofstolenpropertybelongingtodifferentowners.   $   #  1      כWeholdthataggregationofvalueispermissible `X under3914103whenadefendantsimultaneouslyexercisespossessionorcontroloverstolenpropertybelongingtodifferentowners.   BACKGROUND   g Thiscaseinvolvesthetheftof$2,644.92inmerchandisetakenfromnineseparatemerchantslocatedinthePigeonForgearea.Thedefendant,BarbaraAnnByrd,andthreeotherindividuals,RobbiePoole,JanieCarltonandRichardDevonEwing,embarkedonajourneytoPigeonForgeduringwhichtheyplannedtosystematicallystealmerchandisefromvariousstores.ThefourtraveledtoPigeonForgeinagray1976OldsmobileDelta88thatbelongedtoEwing'sfather.Pooletestifiedthathe,thedefendant,CarltonandEwinghaddevisedaschemeforstealingmerchandise.Oncetheyenteredastore,twoofthefourwoulddistractthesalesstaffwhiletheothertwoplacedmerchandiseintoashoppingbag.Theywouldleavethestorewithoutpayingforthemerchandise.ThestolenmerchandisewasthenplacedintothetrunkoftheDelta88.Thefoursomeimplementedthisstrategyatninedifferentstores. Theauthoritiesapprehendedthefoursomeandrecovered$2,644.92instolenmerchandisefromtheDelta88.Thedefendantwasindictedandsubsequentlyconvictedfortheftofpropertyover$1,000.00.Sheraisedseveral (4 -2 issuesonappealtotheCourtofCriminalAppeals.Inoneissue,shechallengedtheindictmentasduplicitousandarguedthatsheshouldhavebeenchargedwithnineseparateoffensesbecausethestolenpropertywastakenfromninedifferentowners.    "  #  2      כTheCourtofCriminalAppealsheldthattheprosecutoracted  properlywithinhisdiscretioninchargingonecountoftheftover$1,000.00underTenn.CodeAnn.3914103.Weagree.   ANALYSIS    ThedefendantraisesasinglenarrowissuebeforethisCourt:"Whetherthetrialcourterredinfailingtodismisstheindictmentduetothefactthatnumerousseparatecountsoftheftwereaggregatedinasinglecountofanindictment?"Sincethe1989CriminalReformActrevisionsandcodificationofTenn.CodeAnn.3914103,thisCourthasnotaddressedtheviabilityofindictmentsaggregatingthevalueofstolenproperty. '   #  3      כ (#   %   Aggregationofseparatetheftsisgenerallypermissiblewhereseparatelarcenousactsare:(1)fromthesameowner[s];(2)fromthesamelocation;and  (3)pursuanttoacontinuingcriminalimpulseorasinglesustainedlarcenousscheme.Seegenerally,Nelsonv.State,344S.W.2d540(Tenn.1960)   (aggregatingseparatetheftsfromatradeunionoveraperiodoftimepursuanttoagenerallarcenousscheme).SeealsoPeoplev.Fayette,657N.Y.S.2d827, h`  829(N.Y.1997)(findingaggregationpermissiblewhereseparatetheftsarefromsameownerandsamelocationifpursuanttoasustainedcriminalscheme).Inthecasenowbeforeus,thestolenpropertybelongedtodifferentowners.Accordingly,theissuewithwhichwearenowconfrontedrequiresustoexaminethevalidityofanindictmentfortheftofpropertythataggregatesthevalueofstolenpropertybelongingtodifferentowners. In1989,thelegislatureeliminatedtheantiquatedandconfusingdistinctionsamongvariouslarcenyrelatedcrimesbyoptingforasingletheftofpropertystatutethatembodiesseparatetheftrelatedoffenses.SeeTenn.Code (#  Ann.3914101(statingcurrenttheftstatute"embraces...embezzlement,falsepretense,fraudulentconversion,larceny,receiving/concealingstolenproperty,andothersimilaroffenses").ThecurrenttheftofpropertystatuteiscodifiedatTenn.CodeAnn.3914103andprovides:8 Apersoncommitstheftofpropertyif,withintenttodeprivetheownerofproperty,thepersonknowinglyobtainsorexercisescontroloverthepropertywithouttheowner'seffectiveconsent.!  ! ! Tenn.CodeAnn.3914103(1991Repl.).Accordingly,theftofpropertymay beaccomplishedinoneoftwomanners:(1)takingorobtainingpropertywithout 5.2 consentandwithanintenttodeprive;or(2)exercisingcontroloverpropertywithoutconsentandwiththeintenttodeprive.  FollowingourdecisioninStatev.Goins,705S.W.2d648(Tenn.1986),it   wouldbeillogicaltoprohibittheStatefromaggregatingvaluesofstolenpropertyunder3914103inallcases.InGoins,thedefendantwaschargedwith h`  receivingandconcealingstolenproperty.Theevidencerevealedthatthepropertybelongedtothreedifferentowners.TheStateindictedandthejuryconvictedthedefendantonthreecountsofreceivingandconcealingstolenproperty.ThisCourt,however,dismissedtwoofthethreecountsondoublejeopardyprinciplesduetotheabsenceofclearproofsupportingtheState'stheorythatthestolenpropertyfromthethreevictimswasreceivedinseparatetransactions. IncasesfactuallysimilartoGoins,itdefieslogictoprohibitaggregationof H!@ amountstakenfromdifferentvictimswhentheStateisalreadyprohibitedbyGoinsfromchargingseparatecrimes.Suchaholdingpotentiallyprovides %  criminalsa"freetheft"oraseriesof"freethefts." Onewhoexercisescontroloverpropertyexceeding$1,000.00invaluebutlessthan$10,000invaluewithoutconsentandwiththeintenttodepriveisguiltyofaClassDfelony.Tenn.CodeAnn.3914105(1991Repl.).TheCode'sfelonytheftgradingsubsectionneitherprohibitsaggregation,requiresthatstolenarticlescontributingtotheaggregatedvaluebetakenfromthesameowner,normandatesthatthestolenpropertybereceivedfromathirdparty. Accordingly,wefindthatthevalueofstolenpropertymaybeaggregatedunder 5.2 Tenn.CodeAnn.3914103whenadefendantexercisessimultaneouspossessionorcontroloverstolenpropertybelongingtodifferentowners.  Inthecasenowbeforeus,thedefendantwasinanautomobilethatcontainedinexcessof$2,500.00instolenproperty.Theevidenceindicatedthatshehadsimultaneousaccesstoorcontroloverthepropertywithoutconsent.Theevidencefurtherindicatedthatthedefendantintendedtodeprivetheindividualownersoftheproperty.Accordingly,theprosecutoractedwithinhisdiscretionandhadprobablecausetoindictthedefendantfortheftover$1,000.00.SeeStatev.Gilliam,901S.W.2d385,389(Tenn.Crim.App.1995)  (statingdistrictattorneyshavebroaddiscretionindeterminingwhatcrimetocharge).Wefindthattheindictmentwasfaciallyvalid.Costsofthisappealshallbetaxedagainstthedefendant,BarbaraByrd,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.   <     T$T$MT$ %     <     JANICEM.HOLDER,JUSTICE PANEL  )"% Anderson,C.J.Reid,Drowota,J.J.Birch,J.NotParticipating