Payne v. State
| Decision Date | 02 April 1924 |
| Docket Number | 24,461 |
| Citation | 143 N.E. 283,194 Ind. 438 |
| Parties | Payne v. State of Indiana |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
From Madison Circuit Court; William A. Ketinger, Judge.
Thomas Payne was convicted of transporting liquor, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Holmes & McCallister, for appellant.
U. S Lesh, Attorney-General, Mrs. Edward Franklin White, Deputy Attorney-General, and Fred I. King, for the State.
Appellant and another, in the court below, were jointly charged by indictment with the offense of transporting intoxicating liquor by means of an automobile. Acts 1923 p. 108, § 1. On being arraigned appellant's associate pleaded guilty and appellant, upon his plea of not guilty, was tried and convicted. His motion for a new trial, assigning as causes therefor that the verdict was not sustained by sufficient evidence and that it was contrary to law, was overruled. This ruling is assigned as error.
We have read all of the evidence disclosed by the record, and from which we conclude that appellant's conviction was brought about by circumstances appearing largely from his own testimony. If we could say that his conviction rested entirely upon evidence tending to show that while he was walking along a public highway he accepted an invitation to ride in an automobile which, at the time and without his knowledge, was carrying intoxicating liquor in which he had no interest and was in no way connected therewith, he would not be guilty as a matter of law. Howard v State (1923), 193 Ind. 599, 141 N.E. 341.
From the evidence we learn that the automobile in this case contained twelve five-gallon cans filled with white mule whisky which was obtained at Fort Wayne, Indiana, which fact became known to the peace officers when the machine collided with another at Alexandria, Indiana. However, if the prevailing evidence of appellant and the evidence of his associate should be given full credit, the verdict of the jury could not be justified. Consequently, when a situation of this character arises, we naturally look to the record for the influence that brought about the result. In making this investigation we are not unmindful of our province, as well as that of the jury and its opportunity of observing the witnesses while giving their testimony. This opportunity may be of considerable aid in determining the credit and weight of testimony. The manner of the witness while on the stand, his apparent sincerity or want of sincerity in the giving of his testimony, his remembrance of incidents closely connected with the transaction under investigation, may or may not be influential, yet they must of necessity be left to the sound judgment of those charged with the duty of finding the facts. On appeal to this court we must take the facts as found and presume correct action at the trial. The effect of observations of witnesses we leave to the jury, but where there is a clear want of evidence or evidence from which...
To continue reading
Request your trial