Martin v. State
| Court | Supreme Court of Georgia |
| Writing for the Court | FISH |
| Citation | 123 Ga. 478,51 S.E. 334 |
| Decision Date | 17 June 1905 |
| Parties | MARTIN. v. STATE. |
123 Ga. 478
51 S.E. 334
MARTIN.
v.
STATE.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
June 17, 1905.
Larceny—Evidence.
If a person, fraudulently intending to get possession of the money of another and appropriate the same to his own use, by false representations induces the owner to deliver the money to him for the purpose of being applied for the owner's use or benefit, and then appropriates it in pursuance of the original intent, he is guilty of both larceny after trust delegated and simple larceny, and may be prosecuted for, and convicted of, either offense.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 32, Cent. Dig. Larceny, §§ 32, 39.]
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from City Court of Macon; Robt Hodges, Judge.
T. D. Martin was convicted of larceny, and brings error. Affirmed.
M. G. Bayne, for plaintiff in error.
Wm. Brunson, Sol. Gen., for the State.
FISH, P. J. Martin was tried in the city court of Macon under an accusation charging him with simple larceny, in that he wrongfully and fraudulently took and carried away $25 in money, of the lawful currency of the United States, of the personal goods of Sam Lewis, with intent to steal the same. Lewis testified that, anticipating that a case would be made against him in the recorder's court of the city of Macon for striking a woman named Lethia, he called on Martin for advice, and the latter informed him that he (Martin) would see the recorder and settle the matter. A few days later Martin told Lewis he had seen the recorder, who said the case could be settled for $23. Lewis thereupon gave Martin $25 in lawful currency of the United States; telling him to settle the case, and with the balance of the money procure a license for Lewis to marry Lethia. Martin was to get the papers settling the case, and deliver them to Lewis. Some three weeks later Lewis made inquiries of Martin as to the matter, and Martin informed him that he (Martin) had paid the money to the recorder and settled the case, and, upon Lewis asking him for the papers, stated that he had not procured them. Lewis never got the money back from Martin, nor did Martin procure the marriage license for him. The state also introduced evidence to the effect that no case had been made against Lewis in the recorder's court; that neither the recorder, nor any officer of the city, had ever agreed to settle any case or charge against Lewis, and that Martin had never paid the recorder or any other official of the city any money in settlement of any case or charge...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reynolds v. State, 6 Div. 941.
...147, 56 So. 56; Williams v. State, 165 Ind. 472, 75 N.E. 875, 2 L.R.A., N.S., 248; State v. Bickel, 7 Mo.App. 572; Martin v. State, 123 Ga. 478, 51 S.E. 334; Doss v. People, 158 Ill. 660, 41 N.E. 1093, 49 Am.St.Rep. 180; Loomis v. People, 67 N.Y. 322, 23 Am.Rep. 123; Taylor v. State, 64 Tex......
-
Mosley v. State, No. 29050.
...and tried for either (State v. Rice, 83 W.Va. 409, 98 S.E. 432; Commonwealth v. Bakeman, 131 Mass. 577, 41 Am.Rep. 248; Martin v. State, 123 Ga. 478, 479, 51 S.E. 334); but the female, being under the age of consent, could not be convicted of incestuous adultery. Thus, she was not an accomp......
-
Innes v. State
...the evidence warranted the verdict finding the defendant guilty as charged. Walker v. State, 117 Ga. 200, 43 S. E. 701; Martin v. State, 123 Ga. 478, 51 S. E. 334; Dunn v. State, 82 Ga. 27, 8 S. E. 806, 3 L. R. A. 199; Mangham v. State, 11 Ga. App. 427, 75 S. E. 512; Carter v. State, 143 Ga......
-
Collins v. State, No. 29099.
...of homicide than the one for which she stands convicted. Mosley v. State, 65 Ga.App. 800, 16 S.E.2d 504; Martin v. State, 123 Ga.478, 479, 51 S.E. 334. The act or acts proved in the instant case include all the elements of both the lower and the higher grades of the crime of involuntary man......
-
Reynolds v. State, 6 Div. 941.
...147, 56 So. 56; Williams v. State, 165 Ind. 472, 75 N.E. 875, 2 L.R.A., N.S., 248; State v. Bickel, 7 Mo.App. 572; Martin v. State, 123 Ga. 478, 51 S.E. 334; Doss v. People, 158 Ill. 660, 41 N.E. 1093, 49 Am.St.Rep. 180; Loomis v. People, 67 N.Y. 322, 23 Am.Rep. 123; Taylor v. State, 64 Tex......
-
Mosley v. State, No. 29050.
...and tried for either (State v. Rice, 83 W.Va. 409, 98 S.E. 432; Commonwealth v. Bakeman, 131 Mass. 577, 41 Am.Rep. 248; Martin v. State, 123 Ga. 478, 479, 51 S.E. 334); but the female, being under the age of consent, could not be convicted of incestuous adultery. Thus, she was not an accomp......
-
Innes v. State
...the evidence warranted the verdict finding the defendant guilty as charged. Walker v. State, 117 Ga. 200, 43 S. E. 701; Martin v. State, 123 Ga. 478, 51 S. E. 334; Dunn v. State, 82 Ga. 27, 8 S. E. 806, 3 L. R. A. 199; Mangham v. State, 11 Ga. App. 427, 75 S. E. 512; Carter v. State, 143 Ga......
-
Collins v. State, No. 29099.
...of homicide than the one for which she stands convicted. Mosley v. State, 65 Ga.App. 800, 16 S.E.2d 504; Martin v. State, 123 Ga.478, 479, 51 S.E. 334. The act or acts proved in the instant case include all the elements of both the lower and the higher grades of the crime of involuntary man......