Pat v. State
| Decision Date | 07 August 1902 |
| Citation | 116 Ga. 92,42 S.E. 389 |
| Parties | PAT. v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
CRIMINAL LAW—AUTRE FOIS ACQUIT—RECEIVING STOLEN GOODS.
1. An acquittal upon an indictment for burglary will not support a plea of autre fois acquit to an indictment for receiving stolen goods, knowing the same to have been stolen.
¶ 1. See Criminal Law. vol. 14, Cent. Dig. § 5 396.
2. A charge of this nature cannot be established by evidence showing that the accused received the stolen goods, not knowing at the time that they had been stolen, but, upon being informed of the larceny secreted the goods, ana retained the possession thereof.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from superior court, Elbert county; H. M. Holden, Judge.
Fannie Pat was convicted of receiving stolen goods, and brings error. Reversed.
I. C. Van Duzer and Geo. C. Grogan, for plaintiff in error.
David W. Meadow, Sol. Gen., for the State.
FISH, J. Fannie Pat was indicted for the offense of receiving stolen goods, knowing them to be stolen. Upon the trial she pleaded autre fois acquit, in that she had, at a former term of the court, been tried and acquitted of the offense of burglary, and that the facts in the burglary case were the same as those in the case upon trial; the two cases involving the same transaction. The plea was overruled, and upon the trial the accused was found guilty. She made a motion for a new trial, which was denied, whereupon she excepted to the judgment refusing the new trial, and also to the overruling of the plea of autre fois acquit
1. The offense of receiving stolen goods, knowing them to be stolen, is not a necessary element in, and does not constitute an essential part of, the offense of burglary. The two offenses are separate and distinct and a verdict of guilty of receiving stolen goods, knowing them to be stolen, could not legally be found under an indictment for burglary. Mangham v. State, 87 Ga. 549, 13 S. E. 558. Therefore, the acquittal of the accused upon the indictment for burglary could not support a plea of autre fois acquit to the indictment for receiving stolen goods, knowing them to be stolen. See Bell v. State, 103 Ga. 397, 30 S. E. 294, 68 Am. St. Rep. 102; Smith v. State, 105 Ga. 724, 32 S. E. 127.
2. Complaint was made of a charge of the court to the effect that if the accused did not know that the goods were stolen at the time she received them, but knew after she received them that they were stolen, and then secreted them, the jury would be authorized to convict her....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bonner v. State
...and to constitute the offense, the person receiving the goods must have this knowledge at the time of receiving them." Pat v. State , 116 Ga. 92, 92, 42 S.E. 389 (1902). Therefore, no violation of the statute occurred where a defendant took possession of the goods without knowing that they ......
- Webb v. State
-
Webb v. State
...116 Ga. 527, 529, 530, 42 S.E. 790. And see '[Bell v. State] 103 Ga. 397, 30 S.E. 294, 68 Am.St.Rep. 102; [Pat v. State] 116 Ga: 92, 42 S.E. 389; Mcintosh v. State, 116 Ga. 543, 545, 42 S.E. 793." In Lowe v. State, 57 Ga. 171, 172, the court held: "An indictment for simple larceny in steali......
-
Butler v. State
...conviction of one is not an essential part of conviction of the other. Shelly v. State, 107 Ga.App. 736, 131 S.E.2d 135. Cf. Pat v. State, 116 Ga. 92, 42 S.E. 389; Smith v. State, 105 Ga. 724, 32 S.E. 127; Bell v. State, 103 Ga. 397, 30 S.E. 294; Blair v. State, 81 Ga. 629, 7 S.E. 855. The ......