Eggleston v. State

• Decision Date: 04 April 1901
• Citation: 30 So. 582,129 Ala. 80
• Parties: EGGLESTON v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

30 So. 582

129 Ala. 80

EGGLESTON v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 4, 1901

Appeal from circuit court, Colbert county; E. B. Almon, Judge.

Albert Eggleston was convicted of embezzlement, and he appeals. Affirmed.

The indictment under which the defendant was tried and convicted was in words and figures as follows: "The grand jury of said county charge that before the finding of this indictment, Albert Eggleston, being the bailee of Thornton Stanley, embezzled or fraudulently converted to his own use or fraudulently secreted with intent to convert to his own use, one $20 gold piece, gold coin of the United States, the personal property of Thornton Stanley, which came into the possession of said Albert Eggleston by virtue of such bailment." There was a second count to the indictment which charged the defendant with the larceny of $20, but the court gave the general affirmative charge in favor of the defendant as to the second count. On the trial of the cause the evidence introduced for the state tended to show that one Thornton Stanley purchased some watermelons from the defendant, and handed him a $20 gold piece for him to change for him; that thereupon the defendant stated he could not change the money, but that they could get it changed at a lunch counter which was near by; that thereupon they went to the lunch counter, and the defendant handed the money to one Wash Childress, who was the attendant at the lunch counter that said Childress put the money in his hip pocket, and went on attending to his duties; that upon the defendant and Stanley asking for the change, the said Childress then reached in his pocket, and handed to one Tom Cobb a piece of coin, and asked him to get the change for him; that thereupon Cobb went to the cash box, dropped the coin which was handed him by Cobb into the box, and brought to the defendant and Stanley two silver half dollars; that said Stanley refused to receive the change, and said that he had given the defendant $20. Said Stanley further testified that after he handed the defendant the $20, and while they were walking to the lunch counter, he put the $20 piece in his pocket, and that when he got to the lunch counter he took from his pocket a piece of money, and handed it to said Cobb but that he, the witness could not say whether it was the $20 gold piece or not. There was evidence introduced for the defendant tending to show that he did not put his hand in his pocket after Stanley handed him the $20 gold piece; that he went to the lunch counter, and handed the same money that had been given him by Stanley to Childress; that it was so dark that he did not know whether the money handed him by Stanley was a $20 gold piece or a silver dollar; but that he did not see the money which Stanley handed him after he gave the money to Childress for the purpose of having it changed. The defendant introduced several witnesses, who testified to the fact that the defendant bore a good character in the neighborhood where he lived, and that he was regarded as an honest man. Upon the introduction of all the evidence, the defendant requested the court to give the following written charges to the jury, and separately excepted to the court's refusal to give each of them as asked: "(1) If from all the evidence you cannot say to a moral certainty what became of the $20, if there was any $20, then you would not be authorized to convict the defendant. (2) If the defendant in good faith put the money on the counter for change, and Wash Childress got and kept it, and converted it, then the defendant would not be guilty. If there is a reasonable doubt from the evidence as to whether defendant converted it or not, you should acquit him. (3) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, as a matter of law, that good character may, of itself, raise a...