Meat theft leads to appeal

PALMER — A judge denied the appeal last week of a woman convicted of assault after she was allegedly involved in the theft of meat from a Three Bears Alaska grocery store.

In a Wednesday ruling, state appeals court judge David Mannheimer lays out the underlying facts of the case, which was originally filed in Palmer District Court in August 2008.

An assistant manager of the store at the corner of Palmer-Wasilla Highway and Trunk Road spotted Georgian R. Young and a man leaving the store with packages of meat in their shopping cart that were not in shopping bags.

Since checkout clerks usually bag everything purchased, the manager had an employee ask the couple for a receipt, but the employee didn’t catch up with Young and the man until they were in the parking lot.

As the man loaded the groceries into a car, Young dug around in her purse for her receipt, then she and the employee walked back to the store so she would have more light.

“While Young was unsuccessfully attempting to locate the receipt in her purse, her male companion drove off with the groceries,” Mannheimer wrote.

When Young tried to leave, the assistant manager told her to wait for Alaska State Troopers, at one point grabbing the strap of her purse.

“In response, Young dug her nails into (the assistant manager’s) hand, leaving a scratch on his knuckles,” Mannheimer wrote.

Young said that all she wanted to do that day was pick up a prescription, take her pills and lie in bed. She said the man gave her a ride to the store so she could get her medicine. The store employee was outside talking to the man when Young left the store and when she was asked for a receipt she assumed the store employee was talking about her pharmacy receipt. As for trying to leave — she said she wanted to go use a payphone to get another ride home.

“Young testified that, as she was leaving, someone grabbed her from behind. She thought that someone was trying to snatch her purse and she began to struggle, but then she stopped struggling when she realized it was (the assistant manager),” Wolfe wrote.

The result of all this was misdemeanor assault and theft charges leveled against Young. She was convicted at trial of the assault but not the theft.

Young later filed an appeal, claiming the judge in her trial, John Wolfe, should have declared a mistrial after Trooper Alfred Borrego testified at trial that “she declined to be interviewed” after troopers arrived.

Generally, juries aren’t allowed to hear if a defendant declined to speak with law enforcement, since it could imply guilt.

Young’s attorney moved for a mistrial at the time, but Wolfe decided prosecutors hadn’t elicited Borrego’s testimony on purpose and instead offered to just tell the jury to disregard the remark. Young’s attorney, choosing not to focus the jury’s attention on the testimony, declined Wolfe’s offer.

“Judge Wolfe noted that, according to the testimony, Young had already talked to at least one other officer. The judge suggested that, given this testimony, the jurors might conclude that ‘[Young] may have just been tired of it,’” Mannheimer wrote.

Wolfe again declined to declare a mistrial when a second trooper testified that Young declined to speak. He offered again to talk to the jury about it and the attorney again declined.

That, the appellate court ruled, was sufficient to fix the problem.

“The improper testimony was potentially prejudicial to Young’s defense because the jury might infer, from Young’s reluctance to be questioned by the troopers, that she was conscious of her own guilt. This potential prejudice obviously did not influence the jury’s decision regarding the theft charge, because the jury acquitted Young of that charge,” Mannheimer wrote.

Contact Andrew Wellner at andrew.wellner@frontiersman.com or 352-2270.