State v. Freeman

• Decision Date: 31 October 1883
• Citation: State v. Freeman, 89 N.C. 469 (N.C. 1883)
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. SAMUEL FREEMAN.

89 N.C. 469

STATE

v.SAMUEL FREEMAN.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October Term, 1883.

INDICTMENT for larceny tried at Fall Term, 1883, of BUNCOMBE Superior Court, before Gudger, J.

The prosecution was commenced in the inferior court before T. F. Davidson, chairman, and associates, where the defendant was convicted, and from the sentence pronounced appealed to the superior court. In the latter court, His Honor reviewed the matters of law raised on the trial below and sent up with the statement of the case, and affirmed the judgment, from which the defendant appealed.

Attorney-General, for the State .

No counsel for the defendant.

ASHE, J.

The defendant was charged with stealing “one purse and thirty dollars in money, and a trunk key, of the goods, chattels and moneys of one Fannie P. McGill.”

On the trial in the inferior court, it was in evidence that the defendant was in the employment of one Wedden, who was the proprietor of a livery stable and line of hacks, and that on the ____ day of ________ 1883, he was sent by his employer to a house in Asheville, with a vehicle to get some baggage to be carried to the train passing Asheville that afternoon. When he went to the house where the baggage was, he was accompanied by a man named Williams. A young lady, from whom the property was alleged to have been taken, was in a room, partially undressed, sitting on the floor writing, with her writing materials and purse, containing three ten dollar bills, some small bills and a key, on the floor near her. Hearing persons approaching the room in which was the baggage, she hastily stepped in an adjoining room, where she remained until two men had carried out the baggage. She returned, resumed her writing, and in a half hour or so thereafter missed her purse. No one had been in the room since she left it except the two men who came for the baggage.

Williams, who accompanied the defendant, testified, that as they went in the room the defendant stooped down, as if to pick up something on the floor, and exclaimed, “Oh, hell!”

The state then offered to prove by one Levi, that some three or four hours after this, the defendant came to his store and purchased some goods, and gave witness a ten dollar bill, from which he took the amount due him. The bill was torn almost across, and there was no evidence whether any of the bills stolen were torn or not. This testimony was objected to, but admitted.

The witness Williams was under indictment for the same offence, but in a separate bill.

The court charged the jury that if they were satisfied the defendant stole the money as alleged, it was their duty to so find, even if they were convinced that the man Williams participated in the commission of the crime. The defendant excepted.

Defendant asked the court to instruct the jury that there was no evidence sufficient to warrant a conviction. The court declined, and the defendant excepted.

He then asked the court to charge the jury that he could not be convicted under the bill, as it charged the stealing thirty dollars in money, and the proof of stealing three ten dollar bills was not sufficient. Refused, and defendant excepted.

The court, in reference to the ten dollar bill in the possession of the defendant recently after the larceny, charged the jury that if they were satisfied it was one of the bills stolen, its...