Wiechert v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reversing because “[t]he victim offered no evidence as to the market value of the [stolen items] at the time of the offense” and instead only provided testimony as to their original purchase price
• reversing because “[t]he victim offered no evidence as to the market value of the [stolen items] at the time of the offense” and instead only provided testimony as to their original purchase price
• “The degree of a theft conviction generally depends on proof of the value of the items stolen, and hence the value of the stolen goods constitutes an element of the crime that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).