State v. Loeb
Citation | 190 S.W. 299 |
Decision Date | 06 December 1916 |
Docket Number | No. 19721.,19721. |
Parties | STATE v. LOEB et al. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Cole County; J. G. Slate, Judge.
Henry Loeb and E. Doss were convicted of larceny, and they appeal. Reversed and remanded.
Fenton E. Luckett and James H. Lay, both of Jefferson City, for appellants. John T. Barker, Atty. Gen., and Thos. J. Higgs, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Defendants, convicts in the Missouri penitentiary, are charged, in an information filed by the prosecuting attorney of Cole county in four counts, with having at different times and in different quantities stolen men's pants from the shipping room of the Obermann Manufacturing Company engaged at the time in the manufacture of pants and overalls within the walls of the penitentiary. On a trial in the circuit court of Cole county in April, 1916, defendants were convicted and sentenced to two years in the penitentiary; their sentences to commence at the expiration of their present terms of imprisonment.
Frank Beckett, a witness for the state, who had pleaded guilty to a charge of receiving goods stolen from the penitentiary, stated that in October and November, 1915, he lived in Granite City, Ill., and was a brother of Bert Beckett, who had been an inmate of the Missouri penitentiary but had been discharged therefrom in January, 1916. In October, 1915, the witness visited his brother Bert Beckett at the penitentiary, but did not know or meet either of the defendants and had never met them until the preliminary examination preceding the trial. Upon witness' return to his home in Granite City, he says he received a letter from Jefferson City, signed "E. Doss," written on the stationery of the King Brand Manufacturing Company, a trade-name used by the Obermann Manufacturing Company in its shipments to retailers. Witness could not produce the letter, but was allowed to state its contents, to the effect that "they would ship some goods to him if he could sell them." To whom the "they" referred is not shown. Inclosed in this letter was an envelope addressed in typewriting to J. B. Baird, Jefferson City, Mo. Witness answered that he would sell the goods. Soon thereafter he received two shipments. The first contained two dozen pairs of pants. These he sold for about $25, put $19 of same in an envelope, and mailed it to J. B. Baird, as per the addressed envelope. The second shipment reached him about October 15, 1915. He sold the goods and kept the money received therefor. A third shipment arrived some time thereafter, but being sent C. O. D., and the charge thereon being $67.50, he could not pay it and did not get the goods. He wrote "them" to send the next package to 7209 Lindenwood Place, St. Louis. His sister owned this place, but no one lived there. Thereafter he received notice of the shipment to him at the freight office in St. Louis. He went to get it and was arrested. There was no signature to any of the letters he received, except the first, other than possibly the name "Joe." None of the letters were produced, the witness stating that he had burned them or they had mysteriously disappeared. He was shown envelopes of the Obermann Manufacturing Company and permitted to state that the printing thereon was the same as on the envelopes which inclosed the letters to him in regard to the goods. He does not know who shipped the goods or received the profits for same. He made a statement to police officers in the city of St. Louis when arrested that the goods had been shipped to him from Jefferson City by a man named Baird. Witness was permitted to state, in addition, that his brother Bert Beckett had told him that Doss, the defendant, was the man who had shipped the goods. Doss was not present at the time of this conversation. He denied having framed up this matter against defendants in a conversation with his brother. On cross-examination witness stated that he did not know by whom the first or any of the other letters received by him in regard to the goods was written; that the charge he had pleaded guilty to was a conspiracy in having received stolen goods; that he received the goods in Granite City, Ill.; does not know who shipped them, nor to whom the money went arising from their sale; all he know is the part he performed in receiving and selling the goods and in forwarding part of the money to Baird; so far as he knows Baird may have shipped them; that his only knowledge as to their shipment by Doss was from the statement made to him by his brother; that the witness has had several conversations with his brother and with the prosecuting attorney in regard to the matter.
Bert Beckett, a witness for the state, testified that he had been an inmate of the Missouri penitentiary from January, 1913, to January, 1916. In October, 1915, his brother Frank Beckett visited him in the penitentiary. There was no conversation between them about handling goods to be taken out of the penitentiary. After the brother had gone, Henry Loeb, a convict, one of the defendants here, asked him if his brother Frank would handle goods stolen out of the penitentiary. Witness says he did not reply, but that Loeb knew where his brother was; that he and Loeb had worked side by side in the State Clothing Factory, and in this way Loeb had learned the brother's address; that Loeb told him others were interested in getting goods out of the penitentiary; that a party wanted to ship some goods out to witness' brother in St. Louis, or some party there that would receive them and send part of the proceeds back to him. During this time, Doss, the other defendant, was employed as a convict stenographer for the Obermann Manufacturing Company. Witness never talked to Loeb in Doss' presence. He was permitted to state that Loeb told him that Doss had told Loeb that he (Doss) was going to ship some goods to the witness' brother Frank with the understanding that Doss was to receive half of the proceeds of the sale; that Doss was to do the writing, and other convicts, shipping clerks, would attend to the balance of the undertaking; that Loeb said he received $4.75 as the proceeds of the sale of the goods and that Doss and two other convicts received equal amounts. Witness says he only knew of his brother's connection with the matter from Loeb's statement; neither he nor Loeb had ever worked for the Obermann Manufacturing Company, and that he had never had any conversation with Doss concerning this or any other matter; that he had never communicated with his brother nor received any money for goods shipped out of the Obermann factory; he did not know who Baird was, but that Loeb told him Doss was signing the name of J. Baird to letters; that Loeb told witness Doss got part of the proceeds for the goods that Doss and others shipped out of the penitentiary; that the money was received in an envelope signed J. Baird; that Doss had a way of getting mail before any one else got it. The court refused to exclude or strike out any of the testimony heretofore objected to in regard to the statement alleged to have been made concerning Doss's connection with this matter outside of his presence.
On cross-examination witness stated he had served three years in the Missouri penitentiary and a term in the Illinois penitentiary. He had been given to understand by the prosecuting attorney of Cole county that the proceeding against him in this case would be dropped. He had agreed to tell all he knew about it. Witness never had any conversation with Doss about this or any other case, and does not know that the goods referred to were shipped out of the penitentiary. When in the penitentiary he worked for the State Clothing Company, but had no connection with the Obermann Manufacturing Company. Loeb worked by witness' side. He never saw Loeb or Doss in possession of any of the goods of the Obermann Manufacturing Company.
E. H. Dulle testified for the state. He was employed in October and November, 1915, as credit man for the Obermann Manufacturing Company. He O. K. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Menz
...conspirator, made at any time, are inadmissible unless a conspiracy is actually shown. State v. Saogsdill, 23 S.W. (2d) 22; State v. Loeb, 190 S.W. 299; State v. Reich, 293 Mo. 415, 239 S.W. 835; State v. Fields, 234 Mo. 615, 138 S.W. 518. (b) Instructions 2 and 3 should not have been given......
-
State v. Stogsdill
...be established by the conspirators alone, but must be shown by other facts and circumstances independent of their statements. State v. Loeb, 190 S.W. 304; State v. Gilmore, 132 N.W. 53. (8) The State, without incompetent, irrelevant and illegal testimony sought to show a conspiracy to kill ......
-
State v. Richards, 32729.
...required, under the statute, to make a statement of the State's case to the jury. [Sec. 3681, R.S. 1929, Mo. Stat. Ann., p. 3227; State v. Loeb, 190 S.W. 299.] The reading of the information to some extent may be a duplication of that statement. An instruction generally given in all crimina......
-
State v. Richards
... ... at the trial of Wright. Suffice to say that trial courts ... should not permit arguments of this nature. [ Pyle v ... Kansas City Light & Power Co., 246 S.W. l. c. 987 (14, ... 15); State ex rel. v. Stanton, 296 S.W. l. c. 191 ... (2); Loeb v. Kimmerle, 9 P.2d l. c. 204 (10); ... Humphreys v. City of San Francisco, 268 Pac. l. c ... 395 (13); Pouncey v. State, 136 So. l. c. 742 (7).] ... They serve no useful purpose in a case. A witness may be ... impeached by showing that he testified to a different state ... of facts at a ... ...