Cronin v. State
| Decision Date | 22 October 1904 |
| Citation | 82 S.W. 477 |
| Parties | CRONIN v. STATE. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Polk County; Geo. L. Burk, Judge.
Bud Cronin was convicted of burglary, and appeals. Modified.
Jno. S. Shamblin and W. A. Guinn, for appellant. Attorney General Cates, for the State.
The plaintiff in error was indicted in the circuit court of Polk county under an indictment containing two counts, charging as follows:
The verdict of the jury was as follows:
"They find the defendant guilty of burglary as charged in the first count of the indictment, and fix his punishment for said crime at three years in the penitentiary, and also find him guilty of larceny as charged in the second count of the indictment, and fix his punishment on said second count for larceny at one day in the county jail of Polk county."
Upon this verdict judgment was entered condemning the plaintiff in error to confinement in the penitentiary at hard labor for a period of three years, and also to confinement in the county jail for a period of one day, and a judgment of infamy was pronounced. From the foregoing judgment he has appealed and assigned errors.
The errors assigned are based upon the facts, but we cannot look to these, inasmuch as the plaintiff in error was allowed 30 days to file a bill of exceptions, and it does not appear that such bill of exceptions was ever marked "Filed." Bundren v. State, 109 Tenn. 225, 70 S. W. 368.
We are of opinion, however, that it was an error in the court below to render a judgment for both of the crimes charged. It is true that the defendant below might have been convicted under the indictment as framed there for feloniously breaking and entering the house referred to or for larceny. Judgment, however, could not be entered against him for both. On a conviction under the first count the crime averred in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McGlothlin v. State
...However, burglary as defined in T.C.A. § § 39--903 and T.C.A. § 39--904, see Cronan § 39--903 and T.C.A. § 39--904, see Cronan v. State, 113 Tenn. 539, 543, 82 S.W. 477; Chapple v. State, 124 Tenn. 105, 112, 135 S.W. 321. Therefore, the fact that the presentment alleges a dwelling house doe......
-
State v. Black
...court cited a number of other Tennessee cases, which did not involve the felony-murder principle. Cited was the case of Cronan v. State, 113 Tenn. 539, 82 S.W. 477 (1904), in which the Court had held that separate convictions of burglary and larceny, growing out of the same act, could not s......
-
Wilson v. Tranbarger
...Jackson v. Bell, 143 Tenn. 452, 455, 226 S.W. 207; Hinton v. Sun Life Insurance Co., 110 Tenn. 113, 118, 72 S.W. 118; Cronan v. State, 113 Tenn. 539, 542, 82 S.W. 477, Bundren v. State, 109 Tenn. 225, 230, 70 S.W. 368; Wright v. Redd Bros., 106 Tenn. 719, 721, 63 S.W. 1120; Jones v. Moore, ......
-
Marshall v. State
...pyramiding punishment by separate convictions and sentences for burglary and larceny committed at the same time and place, Cronan v. State, 113 Tenn. 539, 82 S.W. 477; McAfee v. State, supra, the trial judge simply elected to correct the jury's error in convicting Marshall both of second de......