Cobb v. The State Of Ga.
| Decision Date | 31 March 1886 |
| Citation | 76 Ga. 664 |
| Parties | Cobb. vs. The State of Georgia. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Practice in Supreme Court. Criminal Law. Before Judge Willis. Chattahoochee Superior Court. September Term, 1885.
To the report contained in the decision, it is necessary to add only that the evidence on behalf of the state, connecting the defendant with the offense charged, and showing knowledge on his part, was, in brief, as follows: Certain cotton was stolen from the gin-house of one McKinsey and from one Shipp. The theft occurred at night. The next morning, tracks were found and followed from the gin-house of McKinsey to the gin-house of one Lightner, the keys of which were kept by the defendants, Willis and Cobb. At first they denied all knowledge on the subject, and Cobb claimed to have been in a different county on the previous night, and to have had the keys, but subse-quently they stated that one Lewis Harvey had brought the cotton there; that he placed it on the platform and asked Willis for the key, but was referred to Cobb, who gave it to him; and that this occurred a little before day. Willis stated that he had bought the cotton from Harvey, but had not paid him for it; and after part of it had been identified, he gave it up. A witness testified that between the time when he first saw the cotton in the gin-house and its final identification, it had been moved and an effort made to conceal it. Some of it was identified by the straw and trash in it; the balance could not be identified. The theft was traced to Harvey.
C. J. Thornton; Eugene Wynn, for plaintiff in error.
Thos. W. Grimes, solicitor general, by J. M. McNeill, for the state.
Richard Cobb and Lang Willis were indicted and convicted of receiving stolen goods, knowing them to be stolen, and Richard, being dissatisfied, excepted.
The error assigned is this charge of the court: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Richmond
... ... The proof in any case is ... to be inferential, and among the inferences prominent are ... inadequacy of price, irresponsibility of vendor or ... depositor." [Wharton's Crim. Law, sec. 984; ... People v. [186 Mo. 87] Hertz, 105 Cal ... 663.] To the same effect see Cobb v. State, 76 Ga ... 664, in which the court says: "Knowledge may well be ... deduced from conduct and behavior, the character of the ... person from whom received , and the kind of ... goods , and the hour when received." ... [ Huggins v. People, 135 Ill. 243, 25 N.E. 1002; ... Frank ... ...
-
Gaskin v. State
...State could ever prove by direct evidence knowledge that the goods were stolen. The rule as to this is clearly and well stated in Cobb v. State, 76 Ga. 664(2) and in Birdsong v. State, 120 Ga. 850(3), 48 S.E. When the State has proven that the goods were stolen, I cannot see why the unexpla......
-
Nichols v. State
...v. State, 118 Ga. 42-45, 44 S.E. 859), where the circumstances shown would excite suspicion in the minds of ordinarily prudent men (Cobb v. State, 76 Ga. 664; Cobb v. State, 78 Ga. 801, 3 S.E. 628); and, 'the rule is too well settled to be disturbed that the possession of stolen property im......
-
Ford v. State
...Code is the buying or receiving goods with the felonious knowledge that the goods were stolen. O'Connell v. State, 55 Ga. 191; Cobb v. State, 76 Ga. 664; v. State, 102 Ga. 447, 452, 30 S.E. 971. Before a conviction can be had for this offense, it must be shown that the principal, whether ta......