State v. Hight

• Decision Date: 24 March 1909
• Citation: 63 S.E. 1043,150 N.C. 817
• Parties: STATE v. HIGHT.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

63 S.E. 1043

150 N.C. 817

STATE v. HIGHT.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

March 24, 1909

Appeal from Superior Court, Vance County; W. R. Allen, Judge.

E. E Hight was convicted of embezzlement, and appeals. No error.

In a prosecution for embezzlement of a watch from employers evidence that accused during two years of employment repeatedly took other property from them, disposed of it, and applied the proceeds to his own use, was admissible to show intent.

Defendant was charged with the embezzlement of a watch, known as the "Moss watch," the property of his employers, A. W Gholson & Co. The state introduced A. W. Gholson, who testified: That defendant was in the employment of the firm as clerk and repairer during the years 1907 and 1908; that he had access to the goods (kept a key to the store); that they owned the watch described in the indictment; that it was missed from the store March, 1907; that he found it in the possession of K. W. Edwards June, 1908; that he took possession of it and identified it as the Moss watch. He was permitted, over defendant's objection, to testify that he lost other watches and goods while defendant was in the employment of the firm. He testified to the loss of two watches which he found in the possession of the Jolly-Wynn Co., Raleigh, June, 1908, one watch found in possession of J C. Kittrell, one other found in possession of B. R. Harris some rings and a locket in possession of J. R. Teague. He could not give exact date of loss of any of the articles. Found them all in a few days after finding the Moss watch. To the admission of all of the testimony in regard to the loss of other articles defendant excepted. Some of the articles were the subject of separate indictments pending against defendant. K. W. Edwards testified: That defendant pawned the Moss watch with him May, 1907, that he said it was his watch; kept it as a timekeeper. S. R. Harris testified that defendant pawned two watches with him, which Mr. Gholson identified and he surrendered to him. F. M. Jolly testified: That defendant was in his store in Raleigh. Witness produced two watches. Did not see defendant sell them. They were not there before he came, were there afterwards. Witness produced the watches. They were identified by prosecutor. Evidence of a similar character was introduced in regard to the watch and jewelry found with Mr. Harris and Mr. Kittrell. Mr. Gholson identified all of the property. To the admission of all of this evidence defendant duly excepted. Defendant introduced no evidence. He asked his honor to instruct the jury: "The defendant is only on trial for the embezzlement of the Moss watch, obtained by the prosecutor from K. W. Edwards. If you shall find as a fact that he did convert to his own use the other property of the prosecutor, that does not prove, nor ought to be considered by you as tending to prove, the guilt of the defendant in respect to the Moss watch." This was declined and defendant excepted. His honor explained to the jury the essential elements of embezzlement, and told them: That defendant was on trial for embezzling the Moss watch only. "That if they should be satisfied from the evidence that defendant, while in the employment of the prosecutor as clerk, took the other watches, and other property named in the evidence, other than the Moss watch, for which he was being tried, and converted it to his own use, or any of it, then such taking and conversion might be considered upon the question of the intent with which the watch charged in the bill on trial was taken, if they should find from the evidence that he...