Cases | 2004-Ohio-1222(Ohio Ct. App. 2004) | 2018
The defendant was convicted of receiving stolen property following the discovery, by police searching her home for evidence against her brother on an unrelated murder charge, of almost 2,000 cases (over 40,000 pounds) of stolen microwave popcorn filling her garage. The defendant claimed the popcorn belonged to her brother and that she believed it was obtained by him legally. After the recovery and return of the popcorn to the manufacturing plant from where it was stolen, it was destroyed by the manufacturer out of concern of it being tainted while in the defendant’s home. The retail value of the popcorn was $50,000. The defendant was sentenced to five years of probation and ordered to pay $27,840 in restitution to the manufacturer. The defendant appealed, arguing the order of restitution was improper because: 1) she was not involved in the theft; and 2) the manufacturer chose to destroy the popcorn and she should not be liable for the loss. The appellate court found that the record supported a finding that the defendant knew the popcorn was stolen, that she allowed for the stolen property to be stored in her garage for a number of weeks, and that the popcorn was destroyed by the manufacturer due to the safety concern created by the defendant’s possession of the popcorn. Because the loss occurred as a result of her criminal conduct, the defendant was liable. The order of restitution was affirmed.