Craighead v. State, 47163
| Decision Date | 15 May 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 47163,No. 3,47163,3 |
| Citation | 190 S.E.2d 606,126 Ga.App. 300 |
| Parties | David CRAIGHEAD v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Glenn Zell, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Joel M. Feldman, Carter Goode, Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The appellant, along with George Smith and Edward Burton, was indicted for the burglary of Downing Motors, Inc. and theft of an automobile therefrom. He was found not guilty of burglary but guilty of motor vehicle theft, and received a sentence of five years imprisonment. Smith and Burton plead guilty. Appellant enumerates error on the denial of his motion for new trial (made on the general grounds only) and the court's failure to charge on criminal attempt.
1. The State's evidence was that Craighead and Smith were observed in a Mustang automobile by a police officer responding to a 3:45 a.m. call of a burglary at Downing Motors' car lot. According to the officer, they ducked down when he first arrived. Craighead was behind the steering wheel. The car had been moved about 15 feet and a cable blocking the exit to the lot had been taken down.
There was further evidence by the State that the building on the lot had been broken into and a key to a Mustang had been taken from a desk. Car keys were found on the floorboard of the car in question on the driver's side. The sales manager of Downing Motors testified that the car was the property of Downing Motors.
Co-defendant Burton was called as a witness for the State. He testified Smith broke into the building and took down the cable blocking the exit; and that Craighead got in the car and tried to crank it and then helped Smith move the car.
Co-defendant Smith was called as a witness for Craighead. He admitted the burglary, but stated that he, not Craighead, tried to crank the car and he alone moved it. He stated Craighead had no knowledge of what he, Smith, intended to do, and that Craighead did not assist him. Craighead testified to the same effect.
The evidence authorized the jury to find there had been an unlawful taking by Craighead of a vehicle belonging to Downing Motors, Inc., with the intention of depriving the latter of the vehicle. Code Ann. §§ 26-1802, 26-1813. Any unlawful asportation, however slight (15 feet in this case), is sufficient to show the 'taking' element. It is not necessary that property be removed from the premises of the owner. Stanley v. State, 97 Ga.App. 828(3), 104 S.E.2d 591; Johnson v. State, 9 Ga.App. 409(2), 71 S.E. 507; and Lundy v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. State
...of a distance of 15 feet against her will does not constitute the crime of kidnapping. With this we do not agree. In Craighead v. State, 126 Ga.App. 300, 190 S.E.2d 606 an automobile theft case, a similar argument was used by saying that the movement of an automobile was not sufficient aspo......
-
Hambrick v. State
...the court to charge on a lesser included offense. See Smith v. State, 228 Ga. 293, 294, 185 S.E.2d 381 (1971); Craighead v. State, 126 Ga.App. 300, 302, 190 S.E.2d 606 (1972); Jordan v. State, 239 Ga. 526, 238 S.E.2d 69 (1977); Mallory v. State, 166 Ga.App. 812, 814, 305 S.E.2d 656 The evid......
-
Morris v. State, 72548
...for enticing a child based on the state's alleged failure to prove the asportation element of the crime. In Craighead v. State, 126 Ga.App. 300, 301, 190 S.E.2d 606 (1972), we defined the asportation element of the offense of theft as follows: "Any unlawful asportation, however slight ... i......
-
Ewald v. State, 60173
...shows completion of the crime, it is not necessary for the court to charge on a lesser included offense." Craighead v. State, 126 Ga.App. 300, 302, 190 S.E.2d 606 (1972). "It is never error for a trial court to refuse to charge on a lesser included offense ... when the evidence does not rea......