State v. Wilkerson
| Decision Date | 31 January 1875 |
| Citation | 72 N.C. 376 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. WILLIAM WILKERSON. |
Where A was indicted for stealing a hog, and on the trial it was shown that a hog, belonging to the prosecutor, had been killed and concealed in the corner of the fence covered with leaves; and that A was seen at night, to go to the place and look carefully around and stoop over, as if about to take the hog, and upon being hailed, fled: Held, that these facts alone, would not justify a verdict of guilty.
INDICTMENT for LARCENY, tried before Henry, J., at Fall Term, 1874, GRANVILLE Superior Court.
The defendant was indicted for stealing a hog, the property of one Lowell Thorp. It was in evidence that on the morning of the day, on which the alleged larceny was committed, one Royster, a witness in the case, was passing through a skirt of woods and saw Lowell Thorp feeding his hogs. That on the evening of the same day said Royster returned and saw a dead hog in a corner of the fence. The witness identified the hog as the property of Lowell Thorp. The dead hog was covered with leaves. Royster informed Thorp that one of his hogs was dead, and also where it was. Thorp borrowed a gun from Royster and went off.
Lowell Thorp testified that in consequence of what he had been told by Royster, he borrowed a gun from him, and stationed himself near the corner of the fence where the dead hog was; that he waited there until some time in the night, when some one approached, got over the fence and looked around carefully as if looking for some one, and then stooped over, as if to take up the hog; witness then hailed him, and thereupon the person ran off. That he recognized that person as the defendant Bill Wilkerson.
The counsel for the defence, contended that the State had failed to prove a larceny; and asked the Court to charge the jury, that if they believed the defendant shot the hog and covered it with leaves, he was not guilty.
His Honor refused to charge as requested, but charged the jury that if they believed the defendant shot down the hog and covered it with leaves, with a view to conceal it, until he could return and take it away secretly, that there was in law, a sufficient asportation, and they must find the defendant guilty. The defendant excepted to this charge.
The jury rendered a verdict of guilty, whereupon the prisoner moved for a new trial. The motion was overruled and sentenced pronounced, and the prisoner appealed.
W. H. Young, for defe...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Smith
...as to him upon an involuntary nonsuit. The circumstantial facts in the instant action bear a striking similarity to those in State v. Wilkerson, 72 N.C. 376, where the defendant was indicted for stealing a hog. It was shown there that a hog belonging to the prosecutor had been killed and hi......
-
State v. Green
... ... That is what boys get by being in bad company." To this the defendant made no reply. He introduced no evidence. The court properly held that there was sufficient evidence to be submitted to the jury. State v. Christmas, 101 N. C. 749, 8 S. E. 361. The evidence in State v. Wilkerson, 72 N ... C. 376, falls very far short of the accumulation of incriminating facts in this case, but even that case was doubted in State v. Christmas, supra. It is the combination of circumstances, rather than any isolated one in particular, which justified the submission of this case to the ... ...
-
State v. Green
...that there was sufficient evidence to be submitted to the jury. State v. Christmas, 101 N.C. 749, 8 S.E. 361. The evidence in State v. Wilkerson, 72 N.C. 376, falls very far short of the accumulation of facts in this case, but even that case was doubted in State v. Christmas, supra. It is t......
-
State v. Christmas
...bunch of twigs in the fable, they become very strong. State v. White, 89 N. C. 462, and cases there cited. Counsel relies upon State v. Wilkerson, 72 N. C. 376. In that case there was no evidence of asportation, which was a necessary ingredient in the crime with which the defendant was char......