Celender v. State
| Decision Date | 13 April 1908 |
| Citation | 109 S.W. 1024,86 Ark. 23 |
| Parties | CELENDER v. STATE |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Crawford Circuit Court; Jeptha H. Evans, Judge affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Sam. R Chew, for appellant.
William F. Kirby, Attorney General, and Dan'l Taylor, Assistant for appellee.
Cleter Celender was indicted for larceny and burglary. The larceny was committed by defendant feloniously stealing, taking and carrying away two hundred pints and two hundred quarts of whisky, of the value of one hundred dollars, and of the property of the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company; and the burglary, in the night time, by defendant feloniously breaking and entering a certain railway car, the property of the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company, with the felonious intent to commit a felony, to-wit, larceny. He was acquitted of the burglary and convicted of the larceny. He contends that the evidence adduced at his trial for the offenses charged, without the aid of the testimony of accomplices, was not sufficient to convict him of larceny. Was it sufficient?
About the 11th day of November, 1907, a car of the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company, on its side track at Van Buren, in this State, was broken open and robbed of whisky. Boxes were prized open, and boxes like those contained in the car, marked "Sunny Brook Whisky," without their contents, were found in the vicinity. About this time he (defendant) approached Henry Dunn and said to him "There is a car broken open," pointing in the direction of the car that was broken open, Dunn refused to join him, and he departed. He and others were arrested for stealing the whisky and carried before a justice of the peace sitting as an examining court. At his request he was allowed to testify in his own behalf, as he had the right to do. He testified that he saw Bert Wallace and Chick Smith in the car, and saw them get the whisky, and they gave him three or four pints, and that he got the fifteen or sixteen pints that John Rooney had hid in an old lumber pile. This was whisky that Rooney had stolen from the car and concealed. The witness who heard him testify could not remember the exact amount of this whisky, but he remembered that he testified that it was "in the neighborhood of fifteen or sixteen pints." The whisky was worth seventy cents a pint. He was evidently jointly guilty of stealing the whisky stolen by Wallace and Smith, including the three or four pints he testified they gave him. His voluntary testimony in court, in connection with other testimony, independent of the testimony of accomplices, was sufficient to convince the jury that tried him that he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Co. v. Coy
...character of evidence had been, and was subsequently, admitted without objection. 96 Ark. 52; 87 Ark. 396; 103 Ark. 183; 96 Ark. 7; Id. 52; 86 Ark. 23; Ark. 447; 83 Ark. 331. OPINION SMITH, J., (after stating the facts). Appellant says the petition fails to state a cause of action in that i......
-
Rogers v. State
...of Mary Williams does not corroborate Elizabeth Mosley's and it was incompetent. 88 Ark. 451; 109 Id. 130; 10 R. C. L. 959, 960, §§ 133-4; 86 Ark. 23; 204 F. 909-12-13; 227 Id. 855; Id. 577; 120 Ark. 148. 4. As to the insufficiency of the evidence to support a verdict, see also 1 McLain, Cr......
-
Cranford v. State
...Ala. 7. No objections were made to the testimony. 2. No objection was made as to the sign. Part of the testimony was admissible at least. 86 Ark. 23; 96 Id. 52; Id. 377; 82 Id. 555; 87 Id. 554. The testimony was not prejudicial, as the facts were otherwise proven by competent testimony. 82 ......
-
Roath v. State
... ... tends to connect the defendant with the crime and of a ... material nature. Hudspeth v. State, 50 Ark ... 534, 9 S.W. 1; Vaughan v. State, 58 Ark ... 353, 24 S.W. 885; Scott v. State, 63 Ark ... 310, 38 S.W. 339; Cook v. State, 75 Ark ... 540, 87 S.W. 1176; Celender v. State, 86 ... Ark. 23, 109 S.W. 1024; Earnest v. State, ... 120 Ark. 148, 179 S.W. 174; Strum v. State, ... 168 Ark. 1012, 272 S.W. 359 ... It will ... be remembered that the question of an accomplice was not ... presented to the jury, but it is proper for us to consider ... ...