## Facts

- Everett Webb owned swine kept in farrowing houses and fattening pens along a private driveway off a dead-end gravel road near Jetmore, Kansas.
- On December 2, 1973, around 10:20 p.m., Webb arrived to check his hogs and saw two people in a stock-rack pickup parked near the end of the driveway.
- When Webb exited his car, the pickup sped past him and left the property.
- Webb pursued the pickup for about three miles, obtained its license number, and reported the incident to the sheriff.
- The sheriff later stopped the pickup (driven solely by Gary Dean Gobin) and a second, larger truck driven by Gerald Smith; both vehicles were traveling toward an intersection on a likely route to Dodge City.
- Gobin and Smith were charged with attempted felony theft—attempting to exert unauthorized control over Webb’s swine, alleged to exceed $50 in value.
- No evidence showed that any swine were handled or removed, or that any gates, pens, or houses were opened; the case rested on the circumstances of the late-night presence, flight, and subsequent stop.
- Gobin claimed he had been driving with a girlfriend and parked in seclusion but did not identify her; the explanation was uncorroborated and other evidence suggested he was not truthful.

## Issues

1. What is the standard on appeal for reviewing the sufficiency of evidence supporting a criminal conviction?
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient under K.S.A. 21-3301 to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (a) specific intent to commit felony theft of the swine and (b) an overt act beyond mere preparation toward commission of the theft.

## Decision

- The Kansas Supreme Court reversed Gobin’s conviction.
- Applying the appellate sufficiency standard, the court held the circumstantial evidence did not support a reasonable inference of guilt on all elements of attempted felony theft.
- The court concluded the facts were equally consistent with guilt and innocence and therefore could not establish both specific intent and the required overt act.
- The court rejected a theory of guilt that depended on stacking inferences rather than relying on established facts.

## Legal Principles

- On appellate review, the question is whether the evidence is sufficient to support a reasonable inference of guilt on each element, not whether the reviewing court is convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Presumptions and inferences must be grounded in proven facts; a conviction cannot rest on inference built upon inference.
- Under K.S.A. 21-3301, criminal attempt requires (1) intent to commit the crime, (2) an overt act toward perpetration, and (3) failure to consummate the offense.
- The overt act must go beyond mere preparation and must be a step in a direct movement toward completion, sufficiently near to consummation.

## Conclusion

The court reversed the attempted theft conviction because suspicious circumstances (late-night presence in a stock-rack pickup near confined swine, flight, and later apprehension) did not provide legally sufficient proof of specific intent or an overt act that progressed beyond preparation toward stealing the swine.


State v. Gobin, 216 Kan. 278 (Kan. 1975)