Everette v. State, 321 Ma. 466 (2010) 705 S.E.2d 248 #*252 Everette first argues that her aggravated assault retains stolen property which she knows or should convictions cannot stand because there was no know was stolen. evidence that she, personally or as a party to a crime, pointed a gun at the store clerk or that either the store Knowledge that goods are stolen is an clerk or the store manager was in reasonable essential element of the crime of receiving apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury. stolen goods, and this knowledge on the part 2 of the accused must be proved; but it may be inferred from circumstances, where the Even though there was no evidence that Everette was circumstances would excite suspicion in the inside the store or actually used a weapon during the minds of ordinarily prudent persons. ' incident, there was evidence that she owned the handgun used in the robbery, participated in the The state presented evidence that the Glock handgun planning of the robbery, drove the car (with the other defendants and stolen merchandise inside) from the found in Everette's apartment had been reported stolen in November 2007. The state asserts that it proved scene immediately after the robbery, and was in her beyond a reasonable doubt that Everette should have apartment with the other defendants, hiding, when police arrived shortly after the robbery. There was also known that the handgun had been stolen because, evidence that property taken during the robbery was according to Peterson, she had bought it for $150 or found in Everette's car and in her apartment. Peterson's $175 from "[some guy on the street." A police officer testified that he had purchased two new Glock use of a weapon during the robbery thus can be handguns for $400 and $550 several years before trial, attributed to Everette because one who intentionally aids or abets the commission of a crime by another is a and that the value of such handguns decreases once party to the crime and equally guilty with the principal. they are fired. No evidence was presented as to the age of the handgun purchased by Everette or whether it had Reasonable apprehension of injury can be proved by been fired. There was no evidence that, at the time she circumstantial or indirect evidence as well as by direct bought it, the handgun was worth the amounts the or positive evidence; indeed, the presence of a gun officer testified he had paid for new Glock handguns, 8 would normally place a victim in reasonable or that there was such a gross disparity between the apprehension of being injured violently. * There was value of the handgun and the price Everette paid for it testimony that one of the robbers, while making certain as to excite suspicion. " *#253 demands, pointed a gun at the store manager and at the clerk during the incident. The evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find Everette That Everette purchased the handgun "on the street" guilty beyond a reasonable doubt as a party to the does not prove knowledge that it was stolen. The crimes of aggravated assault as to both store evidence presented is only evidence that *472 Everette employees. possessed or even found a gun that had been reported stolen, and is thus insufficient to sustain a conviction Next, Everette asserts that the evidence was for theft by receiving stolen property, " and the insufficient as to the theft by receiving stolen property conviction must be reversed. (a Glock handgun) because the state failed to prove that she knew or should have known the *471 handgun MILLER, C.J., and JOHNSON, J., concur. was stolen We agree. A person commits the offense of theft by receiving stolen property when she receives, disposes of, or