Centers v. Com.

Decision Date14 November 1958
Citation318 S.W.2d 57
PartiesWilliam CENTERS and Allen Runion, Appellants, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

Davies & Hirschfeld, Newport, for appellants.

Jo M. Ferguson, Atty. Gen., William L. Brooks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

BIRD, Judge.

Appellants, William Centers and Allen Runion, were first indicted, convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the armed robbery of Walter Craddock. About two months after this conviction Walter Craddock died of gunshot wounds inflicted by appellants during the robbery. Appellants were then indicted, convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Walter Craddock. They appeal from the murder conviction. They contend that the trail court should have sustained their joint plea of former jeopardy and directed a verdict of not guilty. No other defense was made during the trial and no other question is presented to this Court.

Appellants contend that the evidence necessary to convict in each case is identical and that the crimes are identical except in name only, and that the first conviction is a bar to the second. This Court does not agree.

In 15 Am.Jur., Criminal Law, Section 380, it is said that the test of identity of offenses is whether the same evidence is required to sustain them and it is further said as follows:

'Offenses are not the same if upon the trial of one proof of an additional fact is required, which is not nessary to be proved in the trial of the other although some of the same acts may be necessary to be proved in the trial of each * * *. (Emphasis ours).

'The fact that some single element of the offense charged may have a single element of some other offense as to which the defendant has previously been in jeopardy is not sufficient to support a plea of former jeopardy.'

In Medlock v. Commonwealth, 216 Ky. 718, 288 S.W. 670, 671, this Court discusses the question of identity and adopts the following rule:

"A test almost universally applied to determine the identity of the offenses is to ascertain the indentity * * * of the evidence in both cases. If the evidence which is necessary to support the second indictment was admissible under the former, was related to the same crime, and was sufficient, if believed by the jury, to have warranted a conviction of that crime, the offenses are identical, and a plea of former conviction or acquittal is a bar. But if the facts, which will convict on the second prosecution, would...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Com. v. Sparrow
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • February 28, 1977
    ...(1930); State v. Calvo, 240 La. 75, 121 So.2d 244 (1960), cert. den. 364 U.S. 882, 81 S.Ct. 170, 5 L.Ed.2d 103 (1960); Centers v. Commonwealth, 318 S.W.2d 57 (Ky.1958); State v. Orth, 106 Ohio App. 35, 153 N.E.2d 394 (1957); State v. Barton, 5 Wash.2d 234, 105 P.2d 63 (1940); Carmody v. Sev......
  • State v. Hall
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • June 25, 1963
    ...'same offense' does not mean the same act or transaction; * * *.' 22 C.J.S. Criminal Law § 278(1), pp. 715, 716, 717. In Centers v. Commonwealth (Ky.) 318 S.W.2d 57, the defendants were convicted of armed robbery. Thereafter the victim died of wounds inflicted during the robbery and they we......
  • People v. Roderman
    • United States
    • New York County Court
    • May 29, 1962
    ...Ga. 109, 118, 117 S.E.2d 573, 148 A.L.R. 980 and authorities cited; People v. Andrae, 305 Ill. 530, 535, 137 N.E. 496; Centers v. Commonwealth, 318 S.W.2d 57, 58 (Ky.); State v. Rodgers, 100 S.C. 77, 82, 84 S.E. 304; State v. Barton, 5 Wash.2d 234, 238, 240, 105 P.2d 63; contra, People v. M......
  • State ex rel. Wikberg v. Henderson
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • March 25, 1974
    ...not bar a subsequent prosecution for the other on that ground. (citing numerous decisions from all jurisdictions). 'In Centers v. Commonwealth (Ky.) 318 S.W.2d 57, the defendants were convicted of armed robbery. Thereafter the victim died of wounds inflicted during robbery and they were con......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT