State v. James

• Decision Date: 20 October 1908
• Citation: 133 Mo. App. 300,113 S.W. 232
• Parties: STATE v. JAMES.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

113 S.W. 232

133 Mo. App. 300

STATE v. JAMES.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

October 20, 1908.

1. LARCENY (§ 1)—ELEMENTS—DEFINITION— "LARCENY."

Larceny is the wrongful or fraudulent taking and carrying away by any person of the personal goods of another without the owner's consent, with a felonious intent to convert them to the taker's use.

2. LARCENY (§ 1) — ELEMENTS — OWNERSHIP AND CONSENT.

In larceny for taking a pocketbook from another's possession, the state must prove that the person from whom it was taken was the owner, and that it was taken without her consent.

3. LARCENY (§ 62)—EVIDENCE—SUFFICIENCY —TAKING OF PROPERTY—CONSENT.

In larceny, proof that a pocketbook was snatched from another's pocket while she was looking at goods in a store was sufficient to show that she did not consent to the taking.

4. LARCENY (§ 60)—EVIDENCE—SUFFICIENCY —OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY.

In larceny for taking a pocketbook from one's pocket, while her possession was prima facie evidence of her ownership, it was not sufficient evidence of ownership to overcome the presumption of innocence, and warrant a conviction.

5. CRIMINAL LAW (§ 559)—EVIDENCE—SUFFICIENCY — REASONABLE DOUBT — INFERENCES.

One should not be convicted of a crime upon proof of an essential element thereof by mere inference.

Appeal from St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction; Wilson A. Taylor, Judge.

Walter F. James was convicted of petit larceny, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Richard A. Jones, for appellant. Phillips W. Moss, for the State.

BLAND, P. J.

On an information filed in the St. Louis court of criminal correction, defendant was found guilty of petit larceny, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $10. His contention in the court below and on his appeal here is that the evidence was insufficient to support a verdict of guilty. Nettie Nolan, a witness for the state, testified as follows: "I reside at 6416 Wade avenue, in the city of St. Louis. About 9 a. m. Wednesday, on the 14th of August of this year, myself and mother, Mrs. Annie Nolan, and Mrs. Amanda Rose, the complaining witness, went downtown in the city of St. Louis, Mo., to do some shopping. We shopped all day until about 3 o'clock in the afternoon, and then while in the Knox Ten-Cent Store on Washington avenue, near Broadway, where Mrs. Amanda Rose stood, looking at some things on the counter, while she was so engaged, I noticed the defendant put his hand in her pocket and take therefrom something, which I afterwards found to be a pocketbook. I told her she had better look and see if the pocketbook was gone. She found it was, and the defendant was just then going out on the street, and my mother ran after him, but they were unable to catch him. I identify the defendant as the man whom I saw put his hand in Mrs. Rose's pocket and take therefrom the pocketbook." Mrs. Annie Nolan testified as follows: "I reside at 6416 Wade avenue, in the city of St. Louis. Wednesday morning, August 14th of this year, my daughter, who has just testified, and myself, went downtown in the city of St. Louis, Mo., with Mrs. Amanda Rose, who was visiting us from Illinois, for the purpose of making some purchases. In the afternoon, while in the Knox Ten-Cent Store, on Washington avenue near Broadway, my daughter called my attention to the defendant, who was just going out of the door of this store, and said he had taken a pocketbook from Mrs. Rose's pocket. I ran after him, but was unable to overtake him, and did not again see him until on Saturday, August 17th, thereafter, when I was called down to the Four courts, and there identified, and now identify, the defendant as the man who ran out of the Knox Store with the pocketbook which he had taken from Mrs. Rose. Mrs. Rose had this pocketbook taken by the defendant in her possession when she went downtown with us in the morning, and she placed therein a $10 bill,...