Snyder v. Com.
| Decision Date | 10 March 1900 |
| Parties | SNYDER v. COMMONWEALTH. [1] |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Franklin county.
"Not to be officially reported."
Joe Snyder was convicted of the offense of robbery, and he appeals. Affirmed.
F. M. Dailey, for appellant.
C.J. Pratt, for the Commonwealth.
While to pick one's pocket without the use of some force or violence or putting in fear is not robbery, yet if the victim is being pushed or shoved about by the pickpocket or his associates, for the purpose of diverting his attention, and the crime is then accomplished, it is robbery, even if the victim is at the time unaware of his loss. Roberson's Ky. Cr. Law, § 290, and cases cited. The proof conduces to bring this case within the rule announced, and the jury might reasonably conclude that the accused picked the pocket of the prosecuting witness while he was being "jostled, run against, and shoved" by the accused or his confederates. Judgment affirmed.
---------
Notes:
[1] Reported by Edward W. Hines, Esq., of the Frankfort bar, and formerly state reporter.
---------
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Com.
... ... need not concur. Williams v. Com., 50 S.W. 240 ... Under the rule announced in this case and the authorities ... cited therein the indictment is sufficient. It was held in ... the same case that to snatch a pocketbook from another's ... hand was robbery, and in Snyder v. Com., 55 S.W ... 679, it was held that, if the victim was pushed or shoved ... about by the pickpocket or his associate for the purpose of ... diverting his attention, and the crime is then accomplished, ... it is robbery, even if the victim is at the time unaware of ... his loss." This ... ...
-
Duluth Street Ry. Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.
...and they are generally recognized. G. S. 1913, § 8635; United States v. Jones, Fed. Cas. No. 15,494, 3 Wash. C. C. 209; Snyder v. Commonwealth, 55 S. W. 679, 21 Ky. Law, 1538. If the thief jostles the victim about for the purpose of diverting his attention, and then, while his attention is ......
-
Duluth Street Railway Company v. Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland
...and they are generally recognized. G.S. 1913, § 8635; United States v. Jones, Fed. Cas. No. 15,494, 3 Wash. C.C. 209; Snyder v. Commonwealth, 55 S.W. 679, 21 Ky. Law, 1538. If the thief jostles the victim about for purpose of diverting his attention, and then, while his attention is so dive......
-
Duluth St. Ry. Co. v. Fid. & Deposit Co. of Md.
...they are generally recognized. G. S. 1913, § 8635; United States v. Jones, Fed. Cas. No. 15,494, 3 Wash. C. C. 209;Snyder v. Commonwealth, 55 S. W. 679, 21 Ky. Law Rep. 1538. If the thief jostles the victim about for the purpose of diverting his attention and then, while his attention is so......