Goss v. State

Decision Date28 January 1905
Citation84 S.W. 1035,74 Ark. 33
PartiesGOSS v. STATE
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court, ANTONIO B. GRACE, Judge.

Affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Robert L. Rogers, Attorney General, for appellee.

The evidence in this case sustains the indictment for forgery and for the uttering and publishing.

OPINION

WOOD, J.

Appellant was convicted of forgery by raising a certain check. He testified that he "did not change the check in any way at any time," and he asked the court to instruct the jury as follows:

"2. If you believe from the evidence that the figures and characters $ 7.70 were inserted in the check after the same left the defendant's hands, or in other way changed after, then said check was not the instrument of the defendant, and can not be considered as evidence against him, and you should acquit him."

This court refused, for the reason, we presume, that it had already given the following:

"If you are not satisfied by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant altered the check in question, or caused it to be done before he parted with the possession of it, you should find him not guilty."

This instruction covered the ground presented in appellant's request, and was in accord with McDonnell v. State, 58 Ark. 242, 24 S.W. 105. The jury was otherwise fully and correctly instructed.

Judgment affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Hogue v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • January 17, 1910
  • St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company v. Taylor
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • January 28, 1905
    ... ... defendant's trains, going from Cherry Valley, in Cross ... County, to Earle Station, in Crittenden County, in this ... State. The train had to pass through Vanndale, an intervening ... station, where it usually stopped; on approaching that ... station the whistle was ... ...
  • St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Richardson
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • November 2, 1908
    ... ... the same legal principles." Hanger v ... Evins, 38 Ark. 334; Railway Company v ... Thomason, 59 Ark. 140, 26 S.W. 598; Furlow ... v. State, 72 Ark. 384, 81 S.W. 232; Goss v ... State, 74 Ark. 33, 84 S.W. 1035 ...          The ... court did not err in giving instruction ... ...
  • Alexander v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • March 5, 1917
    ... ... court on its own motion and by giving instructions Nos. 2 and ... 4, asked by appellant. It is not error to refuse to give an ... instruction correctly reflecting the law as applicable to the ... particular case, if the same subject-matter is covered by ... other instructions. Goss v. State, 74 Ark ... 33, 84 S.W. 1035; McWilliams v. State, 101 ... Ark. 569, 142 S.W. 1147; Morris v. State, ... 103 Ark. 352, 147 S.W. 74 ...           It is ... insisted that the trial court erred in refusing to give ... instruction No. 5, asked by appellant. The instruction ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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