IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON FILED JUNE 1997 SESSION June 19, 1997 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) C.C.A. No. 02C01-9607-CC-00239 Appellee, ) ) MADISON COUNTY VS. ) ) HON. FRANKLIN MURCHISON, ) JUDGE WILLIAM HERBERT STITTS, ) ) (Vandalism Under $500) Appellant. )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: GEORGE MORTON GOOGE JOHN KNOX WALKUP Public Defender Attorney General & Reporter DANIEL J. TAYLOR ELLEN H. POLLACK Assistant Public Defender Assistant Attorney General West Baltimore 450 James Robertson Parkway Jackson, Tennessee 38301 Nashville, Tennessee 37243-0493 JAMES G. WOODALL District Attorney General DONALD H. ALLEN Assistant District Attorney General P.O. Box 2825 Jackson, Tennessee 38302

OPINION FILED: __________________

AFFIRMED-RULE 20

JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE

ORDER The defendant, William H. Stitts, appeals as of right a jury conviction of vandalism of property under $500. He was sentenced to eleven (11) months and twenty-nine (29) days in the local jail. The sole issue for review is whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20 of this Court.

I.

The facts of this case involve the defendant’s actions in response to a general sessions judge’s decision to hold him in custody until he posted bond. The judge, court administrator, a police officer, and an attorney present in the courtroom provided testimony at trial. The eyewitnesses testified that , following the judge’s ruling, the defendant knocked over his chair and was upset and irritated. He was then escorted out of the courtroom. Each witness testified that they saw the defendant approach the door before the glass shattered and heard the defendant make derogatory comments. As he approached the door, he pulled his hand back and rammed his fist through the glass plate in the door.

The defendant did not offer any proof at trial.

II.

The defendant argues the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction of vandalism. Since the eyewitnesses saw the defendant “over [their] shoulder” or “through the door”, he contends that they were not in a position to see him hit the glass door.

As the defendant was escorted to leave, the judge testified that he saw the motion from defendant’s arm or fist in the corner of his eye, and then the glass broke. The court administrator who was seated to the right of the judge and closest to the shattered door saw the defendant pull his arm back and put it through the glass window in the door. The police officer stated that the defendant “took his fist and just broke the window.” An attorney testified that she was “looking right at the

defendant” when he put his hand through the glass window. As stated by the trial judge, “Well, he did it. There wasn’t any question about it. That’s all there is to it.”

We agree.

The judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED pursuant to Rule 20 of this Court.

________________________ JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE CONCUR:

__________________________ PAUL G. SUMMERS, JUDGE

___________________________ DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE