Tariq S. was found, by the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, sitting as the juvenile court, to have been involved in the offenses of third-degree burglary, fourth-degree burglary, and theft of property with a value of less than $1,000. He noted this appeal, contending that the evidence was not sufficient to support such findings.
Tariq contends that there was no evidence from which a rational fact-finder could conclude that he committed a breaking and entering, a required element of both third and fourth-degree burglary, and, further, that there was not sufficient evidence to support the court’s finding that he committed theft. Although he acknowledges that it may be inferred that the possessor of recently stolen property was the thief, he points out that such an inference may be countered by a satisfactory explanation for possession. He insists that “there was nothing implausible about [his] explanation that the ‘Xbox belonged to a friend,’” and maintains that, because he did not testify, the court would have had to assume facts not in evidence and then presume he was lying in order to find that his explanation was not satisfactory.