State v. Williams Stitts

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: June 19, 1997
• Docket: 02C01-9607-CC-00239
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON FILED JUNE 1997 SESSION June 19, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) C.C.A. No. 02C01-9607-CC-00239 Appellee, ) ) MADISON COUNTY VS. ) ) HON. FRANKLIN MURCHISON, ) JUDGE WILLIAM HERBERT STITTS, ) ) (Vandalism Under $500) Appellant. )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

GEORGE MORTON GOOGE JOHN KNOX WALKUP Public Defender Attorney General & Reporter

DANIEL J. TAYLOR ELLEN H. POLLACK Assistant Public Defender Assistant Attorney General 227 West Baltimore 450 James Robertson Parkway Jackson, Tennessee 38301 Nashville, Tennessee 37243-0493

JAMES G. WOODALL District Attorney General

DONALD H. ALLEN Assistant District Attorney General P.O. Box 2825 Jackson, Tennessee 38302

OPINION FILED: __________________

AFFIRMED-RULE 20

JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE

ORDER The defendant, William H. Stitts, appeals as of right a jury conviction of

vandalism of property under $500. He was sentenced to eleven (11) months and

twenty-nine (29) days in the local jail. The sole issue for review is whether the

evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial

court pursuant to Rule 20 of this Court.

I.

The facts of this case involve the defendant’s actions in response to a general

sessions judge’s decision to hold him in custody until he posted bond. The judge,

court administrator, a police officer, and an attorney present in the courtroom

provided testimony at trial. The eyewitnesses testified that , following the judge’s

ruling, the defendant knocked over his chair and was upset and irritated. He was

then escorted out of the courtroom. Each witness testified that they saw the

defendant approach the door before the glass shattered and heard the defendant

make derogatory comments. As he approached the door, he pulled his hand back

and rammed his fist through the glass plate in the door.

The defendant did not offer any proof at trial.

II.

The defendant argues the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction

of vandalism. Since the eyewitnesses saw the defendant “over [their] shoulder” or

“through the door”, he contends that they were not in a position to see him hit the

glass door.

As the defendant was escorted to leave, the judge testified that he saw the

motion from defendant’s arm or fist in the corner of his eye, and then the glass

broke. The court administrator who was seated to the right of the judge and closest

to the shattered door saw the defendant pull his arm back and put it through the

glass window in the door. The police officer stated that the defendant “took his fist

and just broke the window.” An attorney testified that she was “looking right at the

2 defendant” when he put his hand through the glass window. As stated by the trial

judge,

“Well, he did it. There wasn’t any question about it. That’s all there is to it.”

We agree.

The judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED pursuant to Rule 20 of this Court.

________________________ JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE CONCUR:

__________________________ PAUL G. SUMMERS, JUDGE

___________________________ DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE