“Belk’s Department Stores, an entity capable of owning property”

The court of appeals recently decided that an indictment alleging that a defendant stole some shirts from “Belk’s Department Stores, an entity capable of owning property,” did not sufficiently identify the victim as an entity capable of owning property. State v. Brawley, __ N.C. App. __, __ S.E.2d __, 2017 WL 4632820 (Oct. 17, 2017). This post summarizes the decision, considers the possibility of further review, and explains how other states handle this issue. The facts. Defendant Dyquaon Brawley and Lamaya Sanders worked together to steal two Polo shirts from a Belk’s department store in Salisbury. They removed inventory control devices from the shirts and left the store, but the theft was captured on video. The store’s loss prevention personnel provided the footage to police, who obtained arrest warrants for Brawley and Sanders. Sanders eventually pled guilty and testified against Brawley. The charge. Brawley was charged with larceny from a merchant under G.S. 14-72.11. At first he was charged in an arrest warrant, but the offense is a felony so the State eventually procured an indictment. It alleged that Brawley unlawfully, willfully, and feloniously did: STEAL, TAKE, AND CARRY AWAY TWO POLO BRAND SHIRTS BY REMOVING THE ANTI-THEFT DEVICE ATTACHED TO EACH SHIRT, THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF BELK’S DEPARTMENT STORES, AN ENTITY CAPABLE OF OWNING PROPERTY, HAVING A VALUE OF $134.50. Brawley was convicted and appealed. The issue. On appeal, Brawley argued that the indictment was fatally defective for failing to allege that the victim was an entity legally capable of [...]