Lovett v. State

• Decision Date: 01 January 1857
• Citation: 19 Tex. 174
• Parties: SAMUEL LOVETT v. THE STATE.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

19 Tex. 174

SAMUEL LOVETT

v.THE STATE.

Supreme Court of Texas.

1857.

An attempt to commit a crime is defined to be an endeavor to accomplish it, carried beyond mere preparation, but falling short of the ultimate design, in any part of it.

See this case for evidence which was held to be insufficient to sustain a conviction for attempting to steal or entice away a slave.

Appeal from Upshur.Tried below before the Hon. Charles A. Frazer.

Indictment, one count for an attempt to steal a slave, another for an attempt to entice the slave away.The defendant was convicted, and the punishment assessed at three years' confinement in the penitentiary.A motion for a new trial was overruled.The evidence was as follows:

The state introduced one Shepperd, who testified that about the last of December, A.D. 1856, or first of January, A.D. 1857, he was informed by his brother that a traveler by the name of Cleaves had informed him (Shepperd's brother) that one Sam, a negro slave, the property of one Brown, had met him in the road and told him that a man by the name of Lovett had promised to take a boy or man named Jack, the property of Brown, away from the country.That sometime thereafter, either in December, 1856, or January, 1857, witness and several other persons went to Brown's house, and with the consent of said Brown took the said slave Jack some three or four miles to the ferry of Lovett, on the Sabine river; that they caused Jack to expose himself upon the bank of the river with a light; that after some conversation between the slave and Lovett about the locality of the boat, Lovett came over to where the negro was; that witness and another person had given the slave Jack ten dollars and seventy-five cents, with instructions to show the same to Lovett; that the slave did so, with the request that Lovett would count the money; Lovett did so, announced the true amount of the money, and handed it back to the slave.Lovett said that all he had been waiting for was money to carry them off; Jack said that another boy, Mart, had lots of money, and it was agreed that Lovett, Jack and Mart should meet at the river the next Saturday night, to make some arrangement about leaving the next spring.Defendant and Jack had agreed to cross the river to fix up the matter, and had started towards the boat when witness and others arrested him.

Cross-examination disclosed nothing materially differing from the foregoing.

The prosecution next introduced Duncan as a witness in behalf of the state, who testified that he accompanied the said Shepperd at the time that Jack was carried to Lovett's crossing; that he(witness), Shepperd and another, secreted themselves in a ravine some twenty feet from where Jack and defendant were conversing; that he heard Lovett say he had been waiting for money, and heard something said by Lovett about going off with Jack in the spring.He was not lying so close to Lovett as was Mr. Shepperd, and did not hear all that was said.Lovett and Jack started towards boat,...