Johnson drove off in the victim’s truck after killing defendant’s husband, abandoning the vehicle three miles from the Kemmerlin residence. Law enforcement officers later recovered the keys to the vehicle in nearby woods. As defendant concedes in her brief, the intent to permanently deprive need not be established by direct evidence but can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances. See State v. Barts, 316 N.C. 666, 690, 343 S.E.2d 828, 843-44 (1986). We have also noted that the abandonment of a vehicle, regardless of how near the abandonment is to the scene of the crime, places it “beyond [a defendant’s] power to return the property and shows a total indifference as to whether the owner ever recovers it.” Id.) see also State v. Mann, 355 N.C. 294, 304, 560 S.E.2d 776, 783 (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, - U.S. -, - L. Ed. 2d -(Nov. 4,
holding that the jury may find intent to permanently deprive the owner where the defendant parked and abandoned a vehicle in a vacant lot with the windows down holding automobile exeeption did not apply to warrantless search of vehicle where vehicle was not readily mobile because the vehicle was legally parked in parking lot occupants of vehicle were seated on a bench in the playground near the parking lot police officers surrounded the vehicle and the driver of the vehicle was handcuffed for safety purposes holding a stop was effected where officers vehicle blocked defendants vehicle from proceeding holding that where a defendant abandoned a vehicle in a subdivision near where the victims body was found there was sufficient evidence of intent to permanently deprive the owner of the vehicle holding that the arresting officer did not have probable cause to stop the defendant for obstructing traffic because there was no evidence of intent to impede or hinder traffic where the vehicle was only briefly stopped in the roadway and the officer approaching the vehicle from behind did not have to stop or drive around the defendants vehicle