Shutt v. State, No. 29113

Docket NºNo. 29113
Citation117 N.E.2d 892, 233 Ind. 169
Case DateMarch 16, 1954
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

Page 892

117 N.E.2d 892
233 Ind. 169
SHUTT

v.
STATE.
No. 29113.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
March 16, 1954.

[233 Ind. 170] John G. Bunner, Evansville, Raymond W. Gray, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen., Robert L. Sheaffer, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.

BOBBITT, Judge.

Appellant was charged by affidavit with the crime of second degree burglary under Acts 1941, ch. 148, § 4, p. 447, being § 10-701, Burns' 1942 Replacement, tried by the court without the intervention of a jury, found guilty, and sentenced to imprisonment in the Indiana State Prison for a period of not less than 2, nor more than 5 years. From the judgment overruling appellant's motion for a new trial this appeal is prosecuted.

The sole question here presented is the sufficiency of the evidence.

The affidavit charged that 'Brank Shutt on or about the 14th day of April A.D. 1953 at said County and State as affiant verily believes did then and there unlawfully, feloniously and burglariously break and enter [233 Ind. 171] into Bud Dietsch's Package Store, owned and operated by Val A. Dietsch, and located at 501 Market Street, Evansville, Vanderburgh County, Indiana, with intent then and there feloniously and burglariously to take, steal and carry away the goods, chattels and personal property of the said

Page 893

Val A. Dietsch, doing business as Bud Dietsch's Package Store.'

The evidence here is largely circumstantial and an examination of that most favorable to the state discloses:

(1) That the Bud Dietsch Package Store was broken into between the hours of 10 o'clock p. m. on April 14 and 9 o'clock a. m. on April 15, 1953, and that the front door window was broken out and three fifths of whisky, which were the property of Val A. Dietsch and of the approximate value of $15, were taken; (2) that Dallas Irvin Shutt, a brother of appellant, owned a Chevrolet automobile which he loaned to Ollie Shutt, another brother of appellant, on the night the alleged burglary was committed; (3) the manager of a filling station at Seventh Avenue and Franklin Street testified, on direct examination, that he saw appellant in his brother's car in front of his filling station on April 14th, between 1:30 and 2 o'clock a. m., that the car 'pulled away' a short distance and stopped when appellant and another man got out of the car and walked down Seventh Avenue into an alley; that he (witness) then crossed the street and saw 'the car come on around the corner and they stopped in the alley and picked the two boys up'. This witness further testified as follows:

'Q. Now did you see this defendant any more after you saw him get in that car and drive off that morning? A. The next time a couple policemen brought him back to the station.

[233 Ind. 172] 'Q. You saw him there at your station? A. Yes sir, out on the ground, but the car passed there about four or five times after that, after they got in the car.

'Q. You mean the car they got into passed your station four or five times more? A. Yes sir.

'Q. And then you later saw this defendant at your station in the custody of the police? A. Yes.

'Q. And was that the same man you had seen in the car earlier stopped in front of your station? A. Yes.

'Q. And was that the same man you had seen walking down Seventh Avenue earlier? A. Yes sir.

'Q. And was that the same man you had seen get into the car and drive away? A. Sir I didn't see him get in the car.

'By the Court:

...

To continue reading

Request your trial
34 practice notes
  • Baker v. State, No. 29297
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 13, 1956
    ...231 Ind. 147, 168, 106 N.E.2d 912, 32 A.L.R.2d 875; Bowens v. State, 1952, 231 Ind. 559, 562, 563, 109 N.E.2d 91; Shutt v. State, 1954, 233 Ind. 169, 117 N.E.2d The rule of law defining proof beyond a reasonable doubt has been well settled for many years and requires each juror to be so con......
  • People v. Hardiman, Docket No. 118670, Calendar No. 2.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • June 25, 2002
    ...that the doctrine is now "generally discredited" and held in "ill repute." Quoting from an Indiana Supreme Court case, Shutt v. State, 233 Ind. 169, 174, 117 N.E.2d 892 (1954), the Court narrowed the doctrine by confining its applicability as follows: "an inference cannot be based upon evid......
  • Peak v. State, No. 29722
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • January 11, 1960
    ...230 Ind. 85, 90, 101 N.E.2d 922; Harrison v. State, 1952, 231 Ind. 147, 167-168, 106 N.E.2d 912, 32 A.L.R.2d 875; Shutt v. State, 1954, 233 Ind. 169, 174, 117 N.E.2d 892; Dobson v. State, Ind. 1959, 158 N.E.2d 455, Appellant admits that he appended his signature and affixed his official sea......
  • Briscoe v. State, No. 1-1077A238
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • May 2, 1979
    ...231 Ind. 147, 168, 106 N.E.2d 912, 32 A.L.R.2d 875; Bowens v. State, 1952, 231 Ind. 559, 562, 563, 109 N.E.2d 91; Shutt v. State, 1954, 233 Ind. 169, 117 N.E.2d Justice Hunter, writing for the majority in Liston v. State, (1969) 252 Ind. 502, 250 N.E.2d 739, at 743, further explained our du......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
34 cases
  • Baker v. State, No. 29297
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 13, 1956
    ...231 Ind. 147, 168, 106 N.E.2d 912, 32 A.L.R.2d 875; Bowens v. State, 1952, 231 Ind. 559, 562, 563, 109 N.E.2d 91; Shutt v. State, 1954, 233 Ind. 169, 117 N.E.2d The rule of law defining proof beyond a reasonable doubt has been well settled for many years and requires each juror to be so con......
  • People v. Hardiman, Docket No. 118670, Calendar No. 2.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • June 25, 2002
    ...that the doctrine is now "generally discredited" and held in "ill repute." Quoting from an Indiana Supreme Court case, Shutt v. State, 233 Ind. 169, 174, 117 N.E.2d 892 (1954), the Court narrowed the doctrine by confining its applicability as follows: "an inference cannot be based upon evid......
  • Peak v. State, No. 29722
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • January 11, 1960
    ...230 Ind. 85, 90, 101 N.E.2d 922; Harrison v. State, 1952, 231 Ind. 147, 167-168, 106 N.E.2d 912, 32 A.L.R.2d 875; Shutt v. State, 1954, 233 Ind. 169, 174, 117 N.E.2d 892; Dobson v. State, Ind. 1959, 158 N.E.2d 455, Appellant admits that he appended his signature and affixed his official sea......
  • Briscoe v. State, No. 1-1077A238
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • May 2, 1979
    ...231 Ind. 147, 168, 106 N.E.2d 912, 32 A.L.R.2d 875; Bowens v. State, 1952, 231 Ind. 559, 562, 563, 109 N.E.2d 91; Shutt v. State, 1954, 233 Ind. 169, 117 N.E.2d Justice Hunter, writing for the majority in Liston v. State, (1969) 252 Ind. 502, 250 N.E.2d 739, at 743, further explained our du......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT