Spiker v. State, 30912

Decision Date30 September 1966
Docket NumberNo. 30912,30912
Citation219 N.E.2d 904,247 Ind. 595
PartiesCharles SPIKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

Lewis Davis, Indianapolis, for appellant.

John J. Dillon, Atty. Gen., Murray West, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.

RAKESTRAW, Chief Justice.

The appellant was charged by affidavit with the crime of theft. After a trial by the court without a jury, the appellant was found guilty of theft and was sentenced to the Indiana State Prison for a period of not less than one year nor more than ten years. His motion for new trial alleged only that the conviction was not sustained by sufficient evidence and was contrary to law; and his only assignment of error in this court is the overruling of the motion for new trial.

In order to determine if the evidence is sufficient to sustain the finding of the trial court, it is necessary to review the evidence most favorable to the state. Glen Shuler testified that he was the owner and operator of a garage and body shop. That on the morning of February 7, 1965, he was called and discovered that his garage and body shop had been broken into and that an outboard motor, boat, trailer, a 9 Sylvania television set, typewriter, and some power tools were missing. About a week later, after an anonymous telephone call, he went to another location and identified the boat, motor, and trailer by their serial numbers in the garage belonging to Thomas Cates.

Thomas Cates and his wife both testified that at about 2:00 o'clock in the morning of February 7, 1965, the appellant came to their house and asked to store the boat, motor, and trailer in their garage. He offered to give them the television set for the privilege of storing the boat in the garage. He stated at that time that he had purchased the boat at Plainfield. A police officer testified that after his arrest he talked to the appellant on several occasions, and that the appellant gave him a different story each time. At one time he told the officer that he had never had the boat.

The appellant testified in his own defense, and his testimony was to the effect that the boat had been brought to him by one James Masso and two or three colored boys. He did not seem to know any more about James Masso or to know definitely where he lived. And he did not refer to the television set in his testimony.

It is well settled that guilt of the crime of larceny may be inferred from exclusive and unexplained possession of property recently stolen. Lawrence; Morman v. State (1963), 244 Ind. 305, 192 N.E.2d 629; Mims et al. v. State (1957), 236 Ind. 439, 140 N.E.2d 878; Gilley...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Scott v. State, 31005
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Indiana
    • March 6, 1968
    ...trier of the facts and this Court on appeal may not determine the credibility nor weigh the 'explanation' of the witness. Spiker v. State (1966), Ind. 219 N.E.2d 904. Also, regarding the appellant's contention of unfair treatment of the appellant's testimony by the trial judge, as it was st......
  • Vaughn v. State
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Indiana
    • February 10, 1971
    ...inference of guilt. Bolton v. State (1970), Ind., 261 N.E.2d 841; Finch v. State (1967), 249 Ind. 122, 231 N.E.2d 45; Spiker v. State (1966), 247 Ind. 595, 219 N.E.2d 904; Underhill v. State (1966), 247 Ind. 388, 216 N.E.2d 344; Cotton v. State (1965), 247 Ind. 56, 211 N.E.2d 158, 212 N.E.2......
  • Maydwell v. State, 30944
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Indiana
    • May 25, 1967
    ...of the trial court that saw the witnesses, observed their manner and determined whether or not they should be believed. Spiker v. State (1966) Ind., 219 N.E.2d 904. Appellant has presented this Court with no error in the record which would even suggest that he is entitled to Judgment affirm......

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