Stephenson v. State
| Decision Date | 03 April 1925 |
| Citation | 104 So. 600,89 Fla. 351 |
| Parties | STEPHENSON et al. v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Criminal Court of Record, Duval County; James M. Peeler Judge.
N Stephenson and B. Bike were convicted of receiving stolen property, and they bring error.
Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
Showing by evidence necessary to sustain conviction for receiving stolen goods stated. It is essential to a conviction of one charged with the crime of receiving stolen property that the evidence shall show to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt that the accused had knowledge that the property in question was stolen at the time he received it, or that the circumstances of the transaction were sufficiently suspicious to put a person of ordinary intelligence and caution on inquiry.
If necessary element of offense is not established by degree of proof sufficient to convict, verdict of guilty should be set aside. When a necessary element of an offense charged is not established by a degree of proof sufficient to convict, a verdict of guilty should be set aside.
Cromwell Gibbons, of Jacksonville, for plaintiffs in error.
Rivers Buford, Atty. Gen., and J. B. Gaines, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The plaintiffs in error were informed against in the criminal court of record for Duval county for having, receiving, and buying certain stolen property, knowing the same to have been stolen. The goods alleged to have been received by the defendants consisted of twenty-one packages of cigarettes of the value of 15 cents per package. The defendants were convicted of the offense charged and brought a writ of error.
The errors assigned and argued are that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict and that the court erred in all its charges to the jury.
The first assignment is well taken. It is essential to a conviction for receiving stolen property that the evidence shall show to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt that the accused had knowledge that the property in question was stolen at the time he received it, or that the circumstances of the transaction were sufficiently suspicious to put a person of ordinary intelligence and caution upon inquiry. See Minor v. State, 55 Fla. 90, 45 So. 818; Franklin v. State, 66 Fla. 213, 63 So. 418; Worster v. State, 82 Fla. 463, 90 So. 188; Knowles v. State, 86 Fla. 270, 97 So. 716.
When a necessary element of an offense charged is not established by the degree of proof sufficient to convict, a verdict of guilty should be set aside. See McDonald v. State, 56 Fla. 74, 47 So. 485; Baker v. State, 54 Fla. 12, 44 So. 719.
The evidence tended to show that cigarettes of the brand of those which were found in defendant's possession were stolen from a warehouse and had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taylor v. State, 70--403
...knowledge of their stolen character. Minor v. State, 55 Fla. 90, 45 So. 818; Winton v. State, 87 Fla. 104, 99 So. 249; Stephenson v. State, 89 Fla. 351, 104 So. 600; Kemp v. State, 146 Fla. 101, 200 So. 368; 28 Fla.Jur., Receiving Stolen Goods § 8. Suspicious circumstances alone are not eno......
-
State v. Graham, 39308
...of the transaction were sufficiently suspicious to put a person of ordinary intelligence and caution upon inquiry. Stephenson v. State, 89 Fla. 351, 104 So. 600 (1925). The Florida Court has adopted the rule that an inference of guilt may be drawn from the unexplained possession of recently......
-
Broxson v. State
... ... automobile, and this leaves for consideration the only ... question as to whether the defendant knew that such property ... was stolen, or whether all the circumstances surrounding the ... transaction were sufficient to put him on notice and inquiry ... In the case of Stephenson v. State, 89 Fla. 351, 104 ... So. 600, it was held that, to sustain a conviction of one ... charged with receiving stolen property, the evidence must ... show that the accused had knowledge at the time he received ... it that the property in question was stolen, or 'that the ... circumstances ... ...
-
Williams v. State
...character. Minor v. State, 55 Fla. 90, 45 So. 818; Worster v. State, supra; Franklin v. State, 66 Fla. 213, 63 So. 418; Stephenson v. State, 89 Fla. 351, 104 So. 600; Winton v. State, supra; Knowles v. State, 86 270, 97 So. 716. The evidence in this case, at best, raises nothing more than a......