IN RE: LANDON G.
Court of Special Appeals, Woodward, Filed Oct. 30, 2013
Auto Theft- Presence of passenger in a stolen vehicle coupled with evidence that tends to show “a joint enterprise or acting in concert by the driver and the defendant passenger” is sufficient to sustain theft conviction.

Juvenile was passenger in a stolen vehicle. Police attempted to pull the car over and five occupants, including the driver and Landon G., fled.

Other notes from the case:
Motor Vehicle Theft- To convict under CL 7-105 (Motor Vehicle Theft) State need not prove that the defendant was part of the original taking of the vehicle out of the custody or use of its owner
Motor Vehicle Theft- CL 7-105(b) (Motor Vehicle Theft) and 7-203(a) (Unauthorized removal of property) proscribe the same conduct when the subject property is a stolen vehicle
Motor Vehicle Theft- Citing IN RE: MELVIN M. for the proposition that “mere presence in a vehicle, even with knowledge that the vehicle is stolen, is not enough to establish possession of a stolen vehicle to support a theft conviction.” However, “presence
plus other incriminating evidence may be sufficient to establish theft.” Examples: Flight by the driver and the defendant passenger when approached by the police, the use of the vehicle in a crime or other joint activity, and a relationship between the driver and the defendant passenger.