Pride v. State

• Decision Date: 07 July 1906
• Parties: PRIDE. v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

54 S.E. 686

125 Ga. 748

PRIDE.

v.STATE.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

July 7, 1906.

Robbery—What Constitutes—Violence.

The act of the General Assembly approved August 6, 1903 (Acts 1903, p. 43), amending Pen. Code 1895, § 151, defining robbery, by adding to that section "or the sudden snatching, taking or carrying away any money, goods, chattels, or anything of value from the owner or person in possession or control thereof, without the consent of the owner or person in possession or control thereof, " did not create an independent and new statutory offense, nor abolish the distinctive element which differentiates the crime of robbery from larceny; i. e., violence. Robbery which is committed by a sudden snatching, as described in the amending act, is robbery by force, and is punishable as prescribed in Pen. Code 1895, § 152.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 42, Cent. Dig. Robbery, §§ 2, 6.]

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; L. S. Roan, Judge.

Jesse Pride was convicted of robbery, and brings error. Affirmed.

Robert L. Rodgers, for plaintiff in error.

C. D. Hill, Sol. Gen., for the State.

EVANS, J. The defendant was indicted for robbery, and the indictment was framed under the act of 1903, amending Pen. Code 1895, § 151. The charge was laid substantially in the language of the amendment. A demurrer was interposed on the grounds that the indictment failed to allege that the robbery was committed by force or intimidation, and because the act of 1903 created a new statutory offense, and that no penalty was prescribed for the violation of the act. The demurrer was overruled, and the points thereby made are now under review.

Pen. Code 1895, § 151, defines robbery: "Robbery is the wrongful, fraudulent, and violent taking of money, goods, or chattels from the person of another by force or intimidation, without the consent of the owner." The punishment is provided in sections 152, 153: "Robbery by open force or violence shall be punished by imprisonment and labor in the penitentiary for not less than four years nor longer than twenty years." "Robbery by intimidation, or without using force and violence, shall be punished by imprisonment and labor in the penitentiary for not less than two years nor longer than twenty years." The General Assembly subsequently amended section 151 by adding thereto the following language: "or the sudden snatching, taking, or carrying away any money, goods, chattels, or anything of value from the owner or person in possession or control thereof, without the consent of the owner or person in possession or control thereof." Acts 1903, p. 43. The element in the crime of robbery which distinguishes it from larceny is the violence which precedes the taking. "There can be no robbery without violence, and there can be no larceny with it, " Long v. State, 12 Ga. 318. In Spencer's Case, 106 Ga. 692, 32 S. E. 849, it was ruled that suddenly snatching a purse with intent to steal the same, from the hand of another, without using intimidation and where there is no resistance by the owner or injury to his person, does not constitute robbery. This decision was made before the amendment, and, as the amending act was passed soon after its rendition, it would be too bold to assume that the amendment was intended to meet the proposition there enunciated. It could not have been the legislative purpose to...