Carpenter v. State
| Decision Date | 14 April 1934 |
| Docket Number | A-8623. |
| Citation | 33 P.2d 637,56 Okla.Crim. 76 |
| Parties | CARPENTER v. STATE. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Rehearing Denied June 22, 1934.
Syllabus by the Court.
1. If the defendant desires special instructions in the trial of a criminal case, he is required by the provisions of our criminal procedure to present in writing to the court the instructions desired, and it is not error for the trial court to omit to instruct upon every possible question under the defendant's theory of the case, when he has not requested such instructions.
2. The evidence is sufficient to sustain the judgment.
3. There are no errors in the record warranting a reversal.
Appeal from District Court, Stephens County; Tom P. Pace, Judge.
R. B Carpenter was convicted of the larceny of an automobile, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Geo. H Giddings, Sr., and R. H. Morgan, both of Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.
J Berry King, Atty. Gen., and Smith C. Matson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The plaintiff in error, for convenience hereinafter referred to as the defendant, was convicted of the larceny of an automobile and sentenced to serve a term of five years in the state penitentiary, and appeals.
An abstract of the testimony shows N. J. Fuqua, of Duncan, Stephens county, Okl., owned a Chevrolet sedan, and on the night of August 7, 1932, he and his wife attended a show at the Palace Theatre in Duncan, leaving their car parked on Main street; when they came out about 10 o'clock the car was gone; when he left the car, he left the windows and ignition locked; the next time he saw what he identified as his car was in Purcell, Okl., in a garage; the car he examined in the garage had the same kind of casings he had on his car; the figure 2 on the motor number had been changed or mutilated and looked like an 0; the witness identified an aluminum plate on the dashboard under the hood of the car which showed a job No. 32559, and a body No. K1272, these being the same numbers on his bill of sale; the original number of his car was 3271568, and when he examined the car in the garage at Purcell, the number 2 had been changed to 0.
Orin Johnson, the sheriff of McClain county, stated he knew the defendant, Russell Carpenter; that on the 15th day of September, 1932, he and a Mr. Wilson were driving on the highway near where the defendant lived and saw the defendant driving the Chevrolet car alleged to have been stolen; while they were driving near the defendant's home, the defendant passed them one or more times driving the Chevrolet car the state claims was owned by Mr. Fuqua, and Mr. Fuqua testified it was stolen or taken without his knowledge or consent; two or three days after the defendant was seen driving the car near his home, a number of officers went to Mr. McCurdy's home, where they found the defendant; the reason they went to the McCurdy home was the car was parked in front of the McCurdy house; the defendant was not there at the time the officers arrived, which was about midnight; the defendant showed up at the McCurdy home about daylight; the witness had not seen him come, but he was arrested, and they took possession of the car on reports that it had been stolen. The defendant stated he bought the car from a man named Wilder, whom he had met in Oklahoma City. Witness further stated defendant did not give very satisfactory statements as to how he came into possession of the car; defendant stated he traded a model A Ford in on the deal and had given a difference of $342, securing the amount by a note and mortgage, but defendant did not remember the provisions of the mortgage and could not tell when or where the payments were to be made, but stated they were to be made when he got the money.
Purman Wilson, county attorney of McClain county, stated he had known Russell Carpenter practically all his life; on the 19th of September, 1932, when the car was taken from the defendant, he went with Sheriff Johnston to the Carpenter home, and on to the McCurdy place where they found the car, and defendant was arrested; the defendant stated he had never seen the man J. W. Wilder before and had never seen him since he made the trade; that he had traded an old car and paid $342 and given a mortgage to secure this amount, but he did not know if it had been recorded. Witness further stated when he took the car he checked the motor number, and it was 3071568.
Witness N. J. Fuqua was recalled, and on further cross-examination by the defendant stated he had seen the job number and body number only on the bill of sale; that he did not have the bill of sale with him at the trial and had never examined his car to look for any number on it.
Miss Erline Webster, called as a witness on behalf of the defendant, testified she was working in the tax agent's office, at Norman August 9, 1932, and they issued a license tag and certificate of title to J. W. Wilder on his application, the certificate being 3071568; that on the 10th of August, 1932, Wilder, accompanied by the defendant, Russell Carpenter, and a lady came to her office at Norman; the man who accompanied the defendant was the same man who had given his name as J. W. Wilder on the 9th, when she had issued him a license tag. Witness further stated when the man gave her his name as Wilder he stated he was a car salesman from Missouri, and asked how he could sell a car in Oklahoma. Witness could not identify the defendant's wife as the lady with the defendant and Wilder when they came to her office at Norman on August 10th.
Mrs. R B. Carpenter, wife of the defendant, testified the man gave his name as Wilder who sold the car to her husband; that he came back about a month after the sale was made to collect a payment on the car, and her husband paid him the balance of $275; that was the last time she saw the man. The wife of the defendant testified she and her husband spent the entire evening at the home of Mr. McCurdy's near their place, and attended an ice cream supper the night of August 7th,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fields v. State
...74 Okl.Cr. 272, 125 P.2d 227; Green v. State, 65 Okl.Cr. 463, 88 P.2d 907; Adams v. State, 62 Okl.Cr. 167, 70 P.2d 821; Carpenter v. State, 56 Okl.Cr. 76, 33 P.2d 637. Ford v. State, 52 Okl.Cr. 321, 5 P.2d 170, 171, this court held: 'It is not error for the trial court to omit to instruct u......
-
Drew v. State
...considered as a whole, embody the law applicable to the case." See, also, Pulliam v. State, 61 Okl.Cr. 18, 65 P.2d 426; Carpenter v. State, 56 Okl.Cr. 76, 33 P.2d 637; Fitzsimmons v. State, 14 Okl.Cr. 80, 166 P. It was not necessary for the court to define the term "intoxicating liquor," bu......
-
Dickey v. State, A-11836
...record, including the instructions given, that the defendant may have been prejudiced by the instruction complained of.' Carpenter v. State, 56 Okl.Cr. 76, 33 P.2d 637; Ford v. State, 52 Okl.Cr. 321, 5 P.2d 170, 171. We are unable to see from the jury's verdict herein that the defendant was......
-
Chapman v. State
... ... she should have supported them by adequate proof and then by ... requested instruction covering that special issue. The ... defendant may have believed the evidence sufficient to ... support her theory. If so, as was said in Carpenter v ... State, 56 Okl.Cr. 76, 33 P.2d 637, 639: ... 'If, ... when the court instructed the jury, the defendant desired an ... additional instruction upon his theory of the case it was his ... duty to have prepared the same and requested the court to ... give it. In Ford v ... ...