McCorkle v. State

• Decision Date: 31 December 1860
• Citation: 41 Tenn. 333
• Parties: CARROLL MCCORKLE v. THE STATE.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

41 Tenn. 333

CARROLL MCCORKLE

v.THE STATE.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

December, 1860.

FROM WARREN.

The plaintiff in error was tried and convicted, and sentenced to three years' imprisonment in the penitentiary, at the August term, 1860. Judge Andrew J. Marchbanks, presiding. He appealed.

John Spurlock, for the plaintiff in error.

John W. Head, Attorney-General, for the State.

Wright, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

The prisoner was convicted, and sentenced to three years' confinement in the penitentiary of the State, for the offence of obtaining goods under false pretences, and appeals for a new trial to this court. The facts constituting the offence, as shown in the bill of exceptions, are these:--

On the 30th of April, 1860, the prisoner came to the store of A. J. Brown & Co.,--a firm of merchants composed of said Brown, William White, and Samuel Colville, doing business in Warren County,--and stated to Brown, one of the firm, that William Martin had sent him to get some goods. Brown asked the prisoner if Martin had sent an order by him for the goods. The prisoner replied that he had not, but that Martin told him to get the goods and it would be all right. Prisoner further stated that Martin would have sent a written order for the goods, but that he was in a hurry that morning and had not time, as he was on his horse going on the mountain to see about his cattle. Upon these statements made by the prisoner, Brown let him have the goods, to-wit, two shirts, one pair of pants, three yards of drilling, trimmings for the pants, and one carpet-bag, altogether of the value of $8.70. then the property and in the possession of said firm, and which he delivered to the prisoner, and charged to William Martin, by the prisoner, upon the books of the firm.

Some time after the goods were sold, Brown informed Martin of the transaction, and he denied that he had ever authorized the prisoner, in any manner, to get the goods or make the account, and stated that he would not pay for them; and upon the trial Martin proved that he never had authorized the prisoner to get the goods. He further proved that the prisoner had been working at his house, but had left on the night of the 17th of April, and witness did not see anything more of him till about the second Saturday in May afterwards, and knew nothing of his getting the goods from Brown until Brown told him of it. The witness further stated that while the prisoner was working for him he came to town with him and purchased from A. J. Brown & Co. some ten or twelve dollars' worth of goods for the prisoner, but never authorized him to buy anything for witness, unless it was that the prisoner got some liquor from William Meadows by his directions, and which he paid for. This was while the prisoner was living with witness. After the witness heard that the prisoner had got the goods, he took him upon a warrant for getting property under false pretences, and had him carried before a justice of the peace, where the prisoner settled the matter by giving his note, with security, to witness, and witness assumed the debt to A. J. Brown & Co.

This conviction, we think, is proper. The jury have not only found that the statements of the prisoner were false, and that he had no authority from Martin to make them or get the goods, but also that h...