State v. Holt

• Decision Date: 21 June 1937
• Docket Number: No. 35127.,35127.
• Citation: 106 S.W.2d 466
• Parties: STATE v. HOLT.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

106 S.W.2d 466

STATE v. HOLT.

No. 35127.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

June 21, 1937.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cedar County; Thomas W. Martin, Judge.

Sidney Holt was convicted for larceny of a calf, and he appeals.

Reversed, and accused discharged.

O. O. Brown, of Stockton, and H. C. Hembree, of Eldorado Springs, for appellant.

Roy McKittrick, Atty. Gen., and Russell C. Stone, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

BOHLING, Commissioner.

Sidney Holt questions the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction for the larceny of a calf.

The proof was entirely circumstantial. Conceding proof of the larceny, testimony bearing on appellant's criminal agency was meager indeed. Interpolating wherever deemed proper, we adopt the State's statement of the facts; summarizing for brevity but not at the sacrifice of clarity.

Jess Shoemaker's calf was stolen between the hours of 5 p. m. of May 15th, and 1 p. m. of May 16, 1935. The testimony showed that on the evening of said May 15th the appellant was with one Lige Parkinson. Roy Shaw testified Parkinson and appellant visited his home that evening about 10 p. m.; that Parkinson was "pretty well hooked up," wanted to sell witness some veal, and stated he "had an awful time holding that calf by the tail," but did not say what calf. Mrs. Bessie McClure testified she was staying with Lottie Bush on said night; that about midnight Parkinson and appellant came to Mrs. Bush's home and "had something rolled up in a bundle"; that Parkinson, without saying what calf, said "the calf was hard to hold"; that the next morning the bundle was laying on the table; and that when she returned in the evening there was beef "in the cooker," but she couldn't say it was "veal." Jess Shoemaker testified that about a week prior to the trial, at the request of Parkinson, he met Parkinson; and that "at this meeting Sidney Holt was present when Lige Parkinson wanted to compromise as he (Lige Parkinson) would pay the `costs of the court.'"

Such was the testimony tending to establish appellant's criminal agency. Aside from appellant's association with Parkinson, there was nothing to connect him with the calf Parkinson had difficulty in holding or with the beef in the cooker. It failed to establish that difficulty in holding Shoemaker's calf by the tail was a trait peculiarly distinguishing said calf from other calves or that the beef in the cooker possessed any characteristic singling it out as "veal," formerly...