State v. Weaver
| Decision Date | 14 December 1932 |
| Docket Number | No. 32289.,32289. |
| Parties | STATE v. WEAVER. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Howell County; Will H. D. Green, Judge.
Goldman Weaver was convicted of grand larceny, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
L. N. Searcy, of Eminence, and Gordon P. Dorris, of Alton, for appellant.
Stratton Shartel, Atty. Gen., and James A. Finch, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The appellant and Marvin Corbin were charged by information filed under section 4056, R. S. 1929 (Mo. St. Ann. § 4056), in the circuit court of Shannon county, with burglary and larceny committed May 26, 1929, by breaking into a building of the Newton Motor Company, a partnership consisting of R. L. Newton and Ben Newton, and feloniously taking therefrom a 38-caliber Colt revolver of the value of $5, four automobile casings, and other automobile accessories, the whole of the value of $100, at Winona in Shannon county.
Change of venue was granted to Butler county. A severance was allowed Goldman Weaver and he was brought to trial February 3, 1931. A jury found him guilty of grand larceny and assessed his punishment at two years in the state penitentiary. Judgment followed from which he appealed.
The evidence showed that between the evening of May 25, and the morning of May 27, 1929, the business place of the Newton Motor Company was broken into and the articles described in the information taken therefrom; that the tires (casings) were worth $10 each, and other automobile accessories worth $8.50. There was no proof of the value of the Colt revolver.
The defendant was arrested in Denver, Colo., and had in his possession the revolver and certain articles stolen from two other stores at Winona.
The defendant called a number of witnesses to testify that he was not in Winona at the time the offense was committed. The state introduced a number of witnesses to contradict the defendant's witnesses and to impeach some of them. Appellant has filed no brief in this court.
I. An error assigned in the motion for new trial is that there was no substantial evidence to support the verdict. That point is presented in another form in that "no value was proven of the pistol which was alleged to have been stolen, which pistol is the only article the State attempted to prove was taken by this defendant."
The evidence against the defendant was entirely circumstantial. It was shown that Marvin Corbin was in or near Winona May 26th, in a closed car; that previous to that time he had been boarding with the Weaver family at Lyons, Colo., and had purchased an Essex sedan. C. N. Henderson, a police officer of Denver, Colo., arrested defendant in Denver, May 30, 1929, while defendant was attempting to sell certain articles stolen from other stores in Winona, and also the 38-caliber revolver stolen from the Newton Motor Company. At the time of the arrest the automobile of Marvin Corbin was parked near and the goods mentioned were found in it. Weaver admitted at the time that he was in company with Marvin Corbin and had been for several days prior to the time of the arrest. After his arrest, the defendant told several contradictory stories about how he came into possession of the goods which he was trying to sell.
The corpus delicti was clearly proven. Marvin Corbin was in or near Winona in his car near the time the offense was committed. Defendant and Corbin were frequently together in Winona prior to the burglary. The goods stolen from other stores and the revolver stolen from the Newton Motor Company were found in Corbin's car in Denver, Colo., three or four days after the offense was committed. The defendant was in company with Corbin in charge of that car and was attempting to sell those goods, including...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Huff
... ... of State's Exhibits A and B. State v. Stanton, ... 68 S.W.2d 811; State v. Austin, 113 Mo. 538, 21 S.W ... 31. (9) The court properly admitted in evidence the two ... buckets, tire pumps, spoon and jack. State v ... Swarens, 294 Mo. 139, 241 S.W. 934; State v ... Weaver, 56 S.W.2d 25; State v. Nichols, 130 ... S.W.2d 485; State v. Strait, 279 S.W. 109. (10) Such ... assignments as contained in assignment of error No. 9 save ... nothing of review by this court. State v. Oertel, ... 217 S.W. 64, 280 Mo. 129; State v. Biven, 151 S.W.2d ... 1114. (11) All other ... ...
-
State v. Denison
... ... 38706, 352 Mo. 391, 177 S.W.2d 493) ... [ 3 ] State v. Barker, 64 Mo. 282, 285; State v ... Davis, 73 Mo. 129, 133; State v. Owens, 79 Mo. 619, 625; ... State v. Owsley, 111 Mo. 450, 453-4(1), 20 S.W. 194; State v ... Blue, 136 Mo. 41, 45(2), 37 S.W. 796; State v. Weaver (Mo., ... Div. 2), 56 S.W.2d 25, 26(2); State v. Sagerser (Mo., Div. 2) ... 84 S.W.2d 918, 922(2) ... [ 4 ] State v. Owens, supra, 79 Mo. l.c. 624-5 ... (III); State v. Yandle, 166 Mo. 589, 594(II), 66 S.W. 532, ... 533; State v. Armstrong, 170 Mo. 406, 408, 70 S.W. 874, ... [ 5 ] State ... ...
- State v. Salts
- State v. Salts