Facts: A break-in occurred in a home in Falmouth wherein several valuable possessions were found to be missing. There were no witnesses to the break-in or the stealing of property from the home. Upon police inspection of the home, an officer discovered on the floor of the living room an electronic bank transfer (EBT) card with the name of the defendant, Ronald Renaud. The card had been taped together in three separate pieces. The officer recognized the defendant's name and was aware that he had recently resided in Falmouth. The following day a detective contacted the defendant and told him that his EBT card was found on the side of the road and that if he wanted it, he would need to pick it up from the police station. The defendant did not go to the police station.
Procedural History: After a jury-waived trial in District Court, the defendant was found guilty of malicious destruction of property, breaking and entering in the daytime, and larceny over $250. The defendant appealed, arguing that the judge erred in denying his motion for a required finding of not guilty, which was made at the close of the Commonwealth's evidence. The defendant contended that an identification card found at the scene of the crime was insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was in fact the person who had committed the charged crimes.
Issue: Whether the presence of the EBT card bearing the defendant's name in the living room of the burglarized home is sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was the person who had committed the charged crimes?
No. In its decision the Appellate Court followed the holding in Commonwealth v. Morris which stated that although a fingerprint on a mask could support an inference that the defendant was one of the intruders, it could not warrant such a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, because the EBT card bore Renaud's name, it could reasonably be inferred that he was at one point in possession of the card. However, the Commonwealth failed to present evidence that Renaud possessed, and subsequently dropped, his EBT card during the crime. Furthermore, the court was not persuaded by the Commonwealth's argument that Renaud's failure to pick up the card at the police station constituted consciousness of guilt because the defendant was not ordered to pick it up. (MW)
