Slater v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 02 March 1942 |
| Citation | 18 S.E.2d 909 |
| Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | SLATER. v. COMMONWEALTH. |
Error to Circuit Court, Wythe County; Jno. S. Draper, Judge.
George Slater was convicted of larceny of an automobile, and he brings error. Affirmed.
Before CAMPBELL, C. J., and HOLT, HUDGINS, GREGORY, BROWNING, EGGLESTON, and SPRATLEY, JJ.
Thomas F. Walker, of Wytheville, for plaintiff in error.
Abram P. Staples, Atty. Gen., and Walter E. Rogers, of Richmond, for the Commonwealth.
George Slater was convicted of the larceny of an automobile and sentenced to three years in the penitentiary. His position in the lower court was, and here is, that he was guilty of the lesser offense of unauthorized use of an automobile, Michie's Code, section 2154(94) and section 4480.
The facts are not in dispute. On June 6, 1941, at ten o'clock at night, the accused and one Clarence Hopkins attempted or started to take an automobile which was parked on Fourth avenue in Wytheville, but some one appeared on the front porch of the residence in front of which the car was parked and frightened them away. They walked up to Main street and proceeded on Main street to a point in front of the office of Dr. Chitwood. There the car of Dr. Chitwood was parked, and they wrongfully took his car and drove it away without his knowledge or consent. Sometime later, while Slater was driving, the car ran off the road which runs to Bluefield, West Virginia, at a point in Bland county, some fourteen or fifteen miles from Wytheville. The car was wrecked and damaged to the extent of several hundred dollars.
Both Slater and Hopkins had been drinking. After the wreck Slater walked to a filling station one-half mile distant for help. Hopkins had been badly injured. A cab driver was at the filling station and he drove to the place of wreck and brought them to "Fry's Cottage" in Wythe county, where he left them. The report of the wreck caused the Wythe county officers to suspect that the car belonged to Dr. Chitwood. They went to the scene and found Dr. Chitwood's car. Slater and Hopkins were brought to Wytheville, where Hopkins was treated by Dr. Chitwood.
Slater testified that they intended driving to Bluefield, West Virginia, in the car, and there abandoning it. From there Slater said he intended to go to Kentucky by train. He also said he did not have the consent of Dr. Chitwood to take the car, but that he had no intention of stealing or depriving Dr. Chitwood of the car permanently. However he testified that he did not intend to return the car to Dr. Chitwood.
Slater was indicted for larceny and not for the unauthorized use of the car. The case was tried by a jury upon the issue of whether he was guilty of larceny, and not upon the issue of unauthorized use; in other words, the lower court was of the opinion that Slater was either guilty of larceny or he was entitled to an acquittal. The accused took the position that he was entitled to have the jury determine whether he was guilty of the unauthorized use of the car, because he had testified that he had no intention of stealing it. He admitted that he was guilty of the unauthorized use of the car. He asked for instructions that would have submitted to the jury the issue of, whether he was guilty of that offense or larceny. These instructions were refused.
Our quest is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Welch v. Com., 1222-91-2
...with intent to deprive the owner thereof, larceny is complete, though the accused afterwards abandons it." Slater v. Commonwealth, 179 Va. 264, 267, 18 S.E.2d 909, 911 (1942). The jury determined that the defendant possessed the requisite intent at the time of the taking. Because there is c......
-
McEachern v. Com.
...determines the offense." Overstreet v. Commonwealth, 17 Va.App. 234, 236, 435 S.E.2d 906, 907 (1993) (quoting Slater v. Commonwealth, 179 Va. 264, 267, 18 S.E.2d 909, 910-11 (1942)) (emphasis in original). Stated another way, "[t]here is no larceny where the defendant, by actual or construc......
-
Carter v. Commonwealth Of Va.
...with intent to deprive the owner thereof, larceny is complete, though the accused afterwards abandons it. Slater v. Commonwealth, 179 Va. 264, 267, 18 S.E.2d 909, 911 (1942); Whalen, 90 Va. at 549, 19 S.E. at see also Williams v. Commonwealth, 278 Va. 633, 635-38, 685 S.E.2d 178, 179-81 (20......
-
Henry v. State
... ... 103, 154 A. 152, 153 (1931); Sandoval v. People, 176 Colo. 414, 490 P.2d 1298 (1971); Leap v. State, 189 Ind. 538, 127 N.E. 274 (1920); and Slater v. Commonwealth, 179 Va. 264, 267, 18 S.E.2d 909 ... Page 137 ... (1942). See also Annot., 9 A.L.R.3d 633 (1966). As a matter of fact, in ... ...