Hearn v. State
| Decision Date | 14 December 1951 |
| Citation | 28 A.L.R.2d 1179,55 So.2d 559 |
| Parties | HEARN et al. v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Wm. W. Flournoy, De Funiak Springs, for appellants.
Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and William A. O'Bryan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
This is a companion case to the case of Hearn v. State, Fla., 54 So.2d 651.
In the other case the defendants were accused and convicted of the larceny of one cow, the property of one M. M. Adkinson. In this case the defendants are accused and have been convicted of the larceny of eight cows and two calves, the property of one J. A. Ganey.
The defendants in this case filed a plea of former jeopardy averring that the larceny of the nine cows and two calves occurred at the same time, at the same place, and under the same circumstances, even though the cattle were the property of different owners, and that thus there was only one larceny involved for which they could be tried.
The State filed a demurrer to the plea of former jeopardy, which demurrer was sustained and the trial had which resulted in a conviction of the defendants of the larceny of these eight cows and two calves, the property of said Ganey. Thus the only question involved is whether or not the defendants had been placed in former jeopardy by the trial of the case above mentioned, that is, the case involving the larceny of the cow belonging to Adkinson.
The facts in the two cases are identical; the nine cows and the two calves were all on the same open range, were rounded up at the same time, were placed in the same truck by the defendants at the same time from the same loading pen. The cattle were all grazing in and around the same area, and apparently were not too far separated by distance, because the act of rounding up, loading, etc., consumed only a few minutes of time. All of the cattle were transported in the same truck to Selma, Alabama, and sold at the same time, or attempted to be sold as a single lot when the defendants were apprehended.
The defendants were convicted in the morning of the larceny of the one cow belonging to Adkinson, and placed on trial in the afternoon for the larceny of the Ganey cows and calves. Thus the only question posed is whether or not two offenses are committed when separate objects are stolen at the same time, from the same place, under the same circumstances and as part of the same act, although the objects of the larceny belong to two separate individuals, or whether or not such constitutes a single larceny.
So far as we can determine this is a case of first impression in this State, although the converse thereof, that is that where property is stolen from the same owner or from different owners at different times or places or as a result of a series of acts, separated in either time, place or circumstances, one from the other each taking is a separate and distinct offense has been established as the law of this State since the case of Green v. State, 134 Fla. 216, 183 So. 728. If the converse is true, then it should follow that where several articles are taken at the same time and place as one continuous act, though owned by different people, the offense is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Edmond v. State
...2 Leach 707, 168 Eng.Rep. 455 (Crown 1796).3 Theft Act, 1968, § 9, 8 Halsbury's Statutes of England 788 (3d ed. 1969).4 See Hearn v. State, Fla.1951, 55 So.2d 559, and cases collected at 28 A.L.R.2d 1179.5 Section 560.110 R.S.Mo.1953, V.A.M.S.; Williford v. Stewart, 1946, 355 Mo. 715, 198 S......
-
Com. v. Donovan
...190, 27 L.Ed.2d 187 (1970); Sweek v. People, 85 Colo. 479, 277 P. 1 (1929); Reader v. State, 349 A.2d 745, 747 (Del.1975); Hearn v. State, 55 So.2d 559 (Fla.1951); People v. Vaini, 33 Ill.App.3d 246, 247-249, 337 N.E.2d 234 (1975); People v. Cox, 286 N.Y. 137, 142-143, 36 N.E.2d 84 (1941); ......
-
Dyson v. State
...745, 748 (Del.1975) (single larceny when defendant broke into commercial building and stole property from three tenants); Hearn v. State, 55 So.2d 559, 561 (Fla.1951) (single larceny when defendant stole cows belonging to different people that were grazing in the same open range, in and aro......
-
Durley v. Mayo
...only violated the Federal and State Constitutions, but were contrary to a recent decision of the Supreme Court of Florida, citing Hearn v. State, 55 So.2d 559. That petition was argued in the Supreme Court of Florida by counsel for the State, although neither petitioner nor his counsel was ......