State v. Darby

• Decision Date: 12 November 1942
• Docket Number: No. 38199.,38199.
• Citation: 165 S.W.2d 419
• Parties: STATE v. DARBY.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

165 S.W.2d 419

STATE v. DARBY.

No. 38199.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

November 12, 1942.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Butler County; Robert I. Cope, Judge.

Carl Darby was convicted of grand larceny, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Roy McKittrick, Atty. Gen., and Ernest Hubbell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

BARRETT, Commissioner.

Carl Darby was convicted of grand larceny and sentenced to two years' imprisonment in the penitentiary.

The appellant has not caused a bill of exceptions to be filed in this court and hence our review of his cause is necessarily limited to the record proper. Secs. 4146, 4147, R.S.Mo.1939, Mo.R.S.A. §§ 4146, 4147; State v. Day, Mo.Sup., 124 S.W.2d 1189; State v. Melton, Mo.Sup., 92 S.W.2d 107.

The record proper in this instance, as certified by the clerk of the Circuit Court of Butler County, consists of the information, record entries recording the various steps taken during the trial of the case, the empaneling of the jury, the verdict of the jury, a recital of the fact that the defendant filed a motion for a new trial which was overruled, the sentence and judgment of the court, the defendant's affidavit for an appeal and an order granting the appeal which also fixed the appellant's bond.

The information upon which the defendant was tried and convicted says that "* * * Carl Darby, at and in the County of Butler and the State of Missouri and on or about the 30th day of December A. D. 1941, Three Hundred Dollars in good and lawful currency of the United States of America, the goods and chattels of one J. R. Baker, then and there being, feloniously did steal, take and carry away" etc. Except for the italicized words it will be observed that the information substantially follows the wording of the statutes and charges all the elements of grand larceny. Secs. 4456, 4457, R.S.Mo.1939, Mo.R.S.A. §§ 4456, 4457; State v. Akers, Mo.Sup., 242 S. W. 660.

The information does not charge that the "Three Hundred Dollars in good and lawful currency" is money or charge its value as is usually and customarily done. But "dollars" and "currency" of the United States import some value and could not be understood by any one to mean anything other than money. The jury undoubtedly took the words "dollars" and "currency of the United States" to mean what the words are generally understood to mean, "money" or "cash" just as in Neufield v. United States, 73 App.D.C. 174, 118 F.2d 375, 387, the words "money," "cash" and "dollars" were held to mean and to be understood as meaning "money or currency issued by lawful authority and intended to pass and circulate as such, and to mean money having value." State v. Gabriel, 342 Mo. 519, 116 S.W.2d 75; State v. Scott, 332 Mo. 255, 58 S.W.2d 275, 90 A.L.R. 860; State v. Rush, 95 Mo. 199, 8 S.W. 221. Furthermore, the description of "money" in this information is all that the statute relating to the description of money requires (Sec. 3948, R.S.Mo.1939, Mo.R.S.A. § 3948; State v. Scott, supra) and even if it were not, is not such an error as would...