## Facts

- Richard Owens discovered on November 12, 1979, that a newborn “black baldy” bull calf was missing from his pasture.
- Three days later, Owens’s son saw a calf matching that description hidden in a shed with five other calves on adjoining property and notified the sheriff’s office.
- The calves were removed and held in a storage barn while officers investigated ownership.
- A neighbor, Jane Smith, testified that the calves belonged to Mose Alvin Ellis (also known as Kirk Ellis), who was living with her, and that the shed was on property connected to her land (leased to a tenant).
- The next day, Kiowa County Undersheriff Harlan Ross took the disputed calf to Owens’s pasture to see whether a cow would identify it.
- In the pasture, the calf attempted to nurse from several cows but was rebuffed.
- A cow then ran across the open field bawling toward the calf, immediately licked it, and without hesitation allowed it to nurse.
- Lifelong cattlemen testified that this “claiming” conduct in an open field is the accepted test for determining the calf’s mother.
- Ellis testified that he had purchased the calf from a friend and had a sales slip, but he had not previously mentioned that slip before trial.
- Leon Owens testified that on October 23, 1979, he sold Ellis a similar black, white-faced bull calf, creating a factual dispute about whether the calf found was Owens’s missing calf or a different calf Ellis lawfully bought.
- Ellis was convicted in the District Court of Kiowa County, Oklahoma, of Larceny of a Domestic Animal and received a three-year sentence that was suspended.
- Ellis appealed, arguing the evidence was insufficient and the trial court should have instructed the jury to acquit.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence—though circumstantial and disputed—was sufficient to support Ellis’s conviction for larceny of a domestic animal.
2. Whether the trial court erred by refusing to instruct an acquittal based on claimed insufficiency of the State’s proof.

## Decision

- The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the judgment and the suspended three-year sentence.
- The court held that the State’s proof, while wholly circumstantial, established a prima facie case from which the jury could reasonably infer guilt.
- The court treated the cow’s reaction to the calf, together with the testimony of cattlemen describing that reaction as a recognized method of determining maternal lineage, as competent evidence supporting the State’s theory that the calf belonged to Owens.
- The court held that Ellis’s purchase explanation (including the late-mentioned sales slip) and Leon Owens’s testimony about a similar calf created conflicts in the evidence, but resolving those conflicts and assessing credibility were tasks for the jury.
- Because competent evidence supported the verdict, the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury to acquit.

## Legal Principles

- A criminal conviction may be supported entirely by circumstantial evidence; reasonable inferences drawn from such evidence can carry the same probative force as direct testimony.
- When the State’s evidence makes a prima facie case, the defendant is not entitled to an instructed verdict of acquittal merely because the defense offers an alternative explanation.
- Conflicts in testimony and disputes about credibility are for the jury to decide; an appellate court will not disturb a verdict where there is competent evidence on which the jury could base its finding of guilt.
- Testimony from experienced cattlemen concerning customary, reliable methods of identifying cow-calf relationships may be considered by the jury in determining ownership in a livestock-theft case.

## Conclusion

Ellis v. State affirmed a domestic-animal larceny conviction where the State relied on circumstantial proof that the calf found near Ellis was Owens’s missing calf, including the cow’s immediate “claiming” behavior and cattlemen testimony that this behavior is a recognized way to identify a calf’s mother; although Ellis offered a purchase story and evidence of a similar prior sale, the court held that those conflicts were for the jury and that competent evidence supported the verdict.


Ellis v. State, 643 P.2d 330 (1982)