Breaz v. State, No. 26947.
| Docket Nº | No. 26947. |
| Citation | 13 N.E.2d 952, 214 Ind. 31 |
| Case Date | April 05, 1938 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
214 Ind. 31
13 N.E.2d 952
BREAZ
v.
STATE.
No. 26947.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
April 5, 1938.
Steve Breaz was convicted of robbery, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
[13 N.E.2d 952]
Appeal from Criminal Court, Lake County; William J. Murray, judge.
Joseph H. Conroy, of Hammond, and Allen P. Twyman, of East Chicago, for appellant.
Omer Stokes Jackson, Atty. Gen., and Ed. A. Bosse, Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State.
SHAKE, Judge.
Appellant and three others were charged by affidavit with the crime of robbery. The codefendants entered pleas of guilty but the appellant was tried by the court.
The affidavit charged the defendants, including the appellant, with the robbery of Dimitar Silaghi on or about April 26, 1937. Although he was named as a principal, it was the theory of the prosecution that the appellant was an accessory before the fact under Burns' Ann.St.1933, § 9-102, section 2243, Baldwins' Ind.St.1934, which provides: ‘Every person who shall aid or abet in the commission of a felony, or who shall counsel, encourage, hire, command or otherwise procure a felony to be committed may be charged by indictment or affidavit, tried and convicted in the same manner as if he were a principal, either before or after the principal offender is charged, indicted or convicted; and, upon such conviction, he shall suffer the same punishment and penalties as are prescribed by law for the punishment of the principal.’
The appellant was found guilty as charged. He filed a motion for a new trial, assigning that the finding was not sustained by sufficient evidence and that it was contrary to law. A new trial was denied and this constitutes the only error assigned. Appellant contends that there is a total lack of evidence that he directed or had any knowledge of the particular crime charged, and that the undisputed evidence shows that any conspiracy existing between him and his associates was terminated before the commission of the alleged crime.
To sustain the charge the State offered the testimony of the appellant's codefendants and others. This was to the effect that for some considerable time prior to the date of the specific robbery charged the appellant had been the directing head of an active conspiracy to commit robberies in the community, and that, in furtherance of the common purpose, he had supplied his associates with a sawed-off shotgun, ammunition, money for expenses, the use of automobiles, and had pointed out to them six or seven different places or persons who...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Filipiak, In re, No. 28897
...Ind. 277, 287, 11 N.E.2d 171, 12 N.E.2d 501. Workman v. State, 1939, 216 Ind. 68, 74, 21 N.E.2d 712, 23 N.E.2d 419; Breaz v. State, 1938, 214 Ind. 31, 34, 13 N.E. 952; Sanderson v. State, 1907, 169 Ind. 301, 313, 82 N.E. It is true of the element of conspiracy, that it is not usually proved......
-
Hansen v. State, No. 28795
...1925, 195 Ind. 633, 146 N.E. 747. See also: Workman v. State, 1939, 216 Ind. 68, 21 N.E.2d 712, 23 N.E.2d 419; Breaz v. State, 1938, 214 Ind. 31, 13 N.E.2d Appellant questions the probative value of certain evidence because it springs from the testimony of an admitted criminal. While a conv......
-
Ortiz v. State, No. 576S147
...(Burns 1975). Appellants argue that no 'community of unlawful intent' between Williams and Ortiz was proved, citing Breaz v. State, (1938) 214 Ind. 31, 13 N.E.2d 952. Breaz held that in order for one to be liable as an accessory, it 'is sufficient if the previous understanding is substantia......
-
Byrer v. State, No. 3-1080A322
...v. State (1979), Ind., 397 N.E.2d 980, 983; Atherton v. State (1967), 248 Ind. 354, 356, 229 N.E.2d 239, 241; Breaz v. State (1938), 214 Ind. 31, 34-35, 13 N.E.2d 952, 953. The probable and natural consequence of the commission of a burglary is a robbery if the perpetrators are confronted b......
-
Filipiak, In re, No. 28897
...Ind. 277, 287, 11 N.E.2d 171, 12 N.E.2d 501. Workman v. State, 1939, 216 Ind. 68, 74, 21 N.E.2d 712, 23 N.E.2d 419; Breaz v. State, 1938, 214 Ind. 31, 34, 13 N.E. 952; Sanderson v. State, 1907, 169 Ind. 301, 313, 82 N.E. It is true of the element of conspiracy, that it is not usually proved......
-
Hansen v. State, No. 28795
...1925, 195 Ind. 633, 146 N.E. 747. See also: Workman v. State, 1939, 216 Ind. 68, 21 N.E.2d 712, 23 N.E.2d 419; Breaz v. State, 1938, 214 Ind. 31, 13 N.E.2d Appellant questions the probative value of certain evidence because it springs from the testimony of an admitted criminal. While a conv......
-
Ortiz v. State, No. 576S147
...(Burns 1975). Appellants argue that no 'community of unlawful intent' between Williams and Ortiz was proved, citing Breaz v. State, (1938) 214 Ind. 31, 13 N.E.2d 952. Breaz held that in order for one to be liable as an accessory, it 'is sufficient if the previous understanding is substantia......
-
Byrer v. State, No. 3-1080A322
...v. State (1979), Ind., 397 N.E.2d 980, 983; Atherton v. State (1967), 248 Ind. 354, 356, 229 N.E.2d 239, 241; Breaz v. State (1938), 214 Ind. 31, 34-35, 13 N.E.2d 952, 953. The probable and natural consequence of the commission of a burglary is a robbery if the perpetrators are confronted b......