Clodfelder v. State, No. 25033.

Docket NºNo. 25033.
Citation151 N.E. 725, 198 Ind. 277
Case DateMay 20, 1926
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

198 Ind. 277
151 N.E. 725

CLODFELDER
v.
STATE.

No. 25033.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

May 20, 1926.


Appeal from Knox Circuit Court; Thos. B. Coulter, Judge.

Roy Clodfelder was convicted of grand larceny, and he appeals. Affirmed.

[151 N.E. 726]


Arnold J. Padgett and Arthur A. Clark, both of Vincennes, and William L. Slinkard, of Bloomfield, for appellant.

Arthur L. Gilliom, Atty. Gen., and George J. Muller, Jr., Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State.


EWBANK, C. J.

The first count of the indictment on which appellant was tried alleged that, forcibly and by violence and putting her in fear, at Knox county, Ind., he had feloniously robbed, taken, and stolen from the person of Jessie Bond $5 in money, a purse of the value of $10, a bank check of the value of $17.50, two pairs of spectacles of the value of $9 each, and eight notes of the value of $1,000 each, all of which were her property. The second count alleged that he feloniously took, stole, and carried away of the personal goods and chattels of Jessie Bond the same articles of the same alleged value. The jury returned a verdict as follows:

“We, the jury, find the defendant not guilty as charged in the first count of the indictment, but guilty of grand larceny as charged in the second count of the indictment, and that his age is 35 years.”

The defendant filed a motion for a new trial, for the alleged reasons that the verdict is contrary to law, and that it is not sustained by sufficient evidence, and that one of the jurors was guilty of misconduct, in that he had expressed an opinion the evening before the commencement of the trial that defendant was guilty and ought to be in the “pen” for life. Overruling that motion is the only error assigned.

[1] The statute provides that:

“An indictment or affidavit for larceny may contain a count *** for obtaining the same goods by robbery *** and the accused may be convicted of either offense.” Section 2212, Burns' 1926; section 185, c. 169, Acts 1905, p. 584 (624).

And the mere fact that defendant was found not guilty of the charge of robbery contained in one count did not make a verdict contrary to law which found him guilty of larceny, as charged in the other count.

[2] In determining whether or not a verdict of guilty is sustained by sufficient evidence, the Supreme Court does not weigh the evidence nor undertake to decide any disputed questions of fact; but it accepts as true all evidence which tends to prove what was found by the verdict, and refuses to consider any which tends to prove the contrary, and then determines whether or not that which tends to prove the facts found by the verdict, standing alone and undisputed, sustains the inference of defendant's guilt drawn by the jury. Small v. State, 190 Ind. 406, 408, 130 N. E. 401;Tutsbree v. State, 195 Ind. 581, 583, 145 N. E. 490;Wolfa v. State (Ind. Sup.) 150 N. E. 98.

[3] There was evidence that in the spring of 1921 Mrs. Jessie Bond sold defendant an elevator in Oaktown, about 12 miles north of Vincennes, for $13,500, and that he paid her $3,500 in cash and gave her ten notes for $1,000 each, dated April 29, 1921,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • Hawkins v. State, No. 27534.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • November 5, 1941
    ...McCallister v. State, 1940, 217 Ind. 65, 26 N.E.2d 391;Anderson v. State, 1933, 205 Ind. 607, 186 N.E. 316;Clodfelder v. State, 1926, 198 Ind. 277,154 N.E. 725. The record discloses that juror Judd was chosen from the second special venire. The names of the talesmen in that and the first sp......
  • Anderson v. State, No. 26012.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • June 29, 1933
    ...are filed a question of fact is presented to the lower court, and this court will not weigh conflicting evidence. Clodfelder v. State, 198 Ind. 277, 151 N. E. 725. The appellant very seriously contends that the lower court erred in the giving, and refusing to give, certain instructions. It ......
  • Judah v. Goldsmith, No. 12895.
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • January 10, 1929
    ...to the court as questions of fact. The court having weighed this evidence, this court will not disturb its findings. Clodfelder v. State, 198 Ind. 277, 151 N. E. 725. [7][8][9] Appellee forcefully contends that the instructions are not in the record, and that hence appellant's objections to......
3 cases
  • Hawkins v. State, No. 27534.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • November 5, 1941
    ...McCallister v. State, 1940, 217 Ind. 65, 26 N.E.2d 391;Anderson v. State, 1933, 205 Ind. 607, 186 N.E. 316;Clodfelder v. State, 1926, 198 Ind. 277,154 N.E. 725. The record discloses that juror Judd was chosen from the second special venire. The names of the talesmen in that and the first sp......
  • Anderson v. State, No. 26012.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • June 29, 1933
    ...are filed a question of fact is presented to the lower court, and this court will not weigh conflicting evidence. Clodfelder v. State, 198 Ind. 277, 151 N. E. 725. The appellant very seriously contends that the lower court erred in the giving, and refusing to give, certain instructions. It ......
  • Judah v. Goldsmith, No. 12895.
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • January 10, 1929
    ...to the court as questions of fact. The court having weighed this evidence, this court will not disturb its findings. Clodfelder v. State, 198 Ind. 277, 151 N. E. 725. [7][8][9] Appellee forcefully contends that the instructions are not in the record, and that hence appellant's objections to......

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