## Facts

- Kevin Dwayne Hoselton (age 18) went with several friends onto a docked barge that contained a storage unit.
- Items were stolen from the storage unit, including tools, grease guns, grease, and a battery charger.
- Hoselton was indicted as a principal in the first degree for breaking and entering or entering without breaking a vessel with intent to commit larceny under W. Va. Code § 61-3-12.
- The State’s only evidence linking Hoselton to the crime was Hoselton’s voluntary statement to police.
- In his statement, Hoselton said he was “standing outside” while others tried to open the door, and he could not see them because he was at the end of the barge.
- When asked if he was “keeping a look-out,” Hoselton responded, “You could say that,” while also stating he “just didn’t want to go down in there.”
- Hoselton maintained he did not know of any intent to steal until he heard the storage-unit door being opened, walked over, and saw others handling the goods.
- After observing the theft, Hoselton said he went back toward the other end of the barge and waited in an automobile.
- Hoselton did not help remove or load the items and received none of the stolen property or proceeds.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, was sufficient to prove Hoselton intentionally aided and abetted the crime by acting as a lookout or otherwise participating, supporting conviction as a principal.
2. Whether Hoselton’s presence at the scene, knowledge that a crime was occurring, and his ambiguous statement about being a lookout established the intent and assistance required for accomplice liability.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed the conviction and set it aside.
- The court held the evidence was legally insufficient to prove Hoselton acted as a lookout or otherwise aided and abetted the entry without breaking with intent to commit larceny.
- The court concluded the State failed to show intentional association with, and participation in, the criminal venture.

## Legal Principles

- A person is liable as an aider and abettor (principal in the second degree) only if the person associates with the venture, participates in it as something the person wishes to bring about, and seeks by action to make it succeed.
- Lookouts can be aiders and abettors, but the State must prove intentional assistance rather than infer it from equivocal facts.
- Mere presence at the scene, even coupled with knowledge that a crime is being committed, does not establish accomplice liability without proof of intentional aid or encouragement.
- An ambiguous, colloquial acknowledgment of possibly being a lookout, without corroborating evidence of a shared plan or active facilitation, is insufficient to support conviction.

## Conclusion

The court reversed Hoselton’s conviction because the State proved only his presence and an equivocal statement, not the intentional assistance and purposive participation required for accomplice liability as a lookout or aider and abettor.


State v. Hoselton, 179 W. Va. 645, 371 S.E.2d 366 (W. Va. 1988)