The State v. Wright
| Decision Date | 20 November 1906 |
| Citation | 97 S.W. 874,199 Mo. 161 |
| Parties | THE STATE v. WRIGHT, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Christian Circuit Court. -- Hon. John T. Moore, Judge.
Reversed and remanded.
G. A Watson, Geo. W. Thornsberry and J. C. West for appellant.
Instruction 3, on the presumption arising from recent possession of the stolen property, is too narrow and restrictive, in view of testimony of good character. State v. Bruin, 34 Mo 541; State v. Kelley, 73 Mo. 608; State v Sidney, 74 Mo. 390; State v. Crank, 75 Mo. 406; State v. North, 95 Mo. 615; State v. Walker, 194 Mo. 253.
Herbert S. Hadley, Attorney-General, and N. T. Gentry, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
The State's instructions were fair and full, and defendant has no grounds for complaint. They defined the crime of larceny, defined reasonable doubt, told the jury how to weigh the testimony of the defendant and the different witnesses, told the jury that the information was a formal charge, and also explained the value of such circumstances as the flight of the defendant, and the recent possession of stolen property. As this court has often said, "Instructions must be read and considered together." State v. Walker, 92 S.W. 662; State v. Riney, 137 Mo. 105.
From a conviction of grand larceny in the circuit court of Christian county and the fixing of his punishment at two years imprisonment in the penitentiary, under an information filed by the prosecuting attorney of said county charging him with stealing certain hogs of the value of fifty dollars, the property of one Ray A. Blunt, defendant appeals.
At the time of the alleged larceny one Ray A. Blunt was the owner of nine hogs, namely, four barrows, marked with a crop in the right ear and an under half crop in the left; one black sow; one black gilt; two sows, black and white spotted; and one black barrow with white spots. The hogs were kept on Blunt's farm in Christian county, near Highlandville, and were missed on May 31, 1903. While they ran out in the public road, they came up every night to get their feed. The value of the hogs was variously stated at from thirty-five to fifty dollars. About June 1, 1903, defendant traded nine hogs to one Dick Campbell for two hogs; some of the nine were some of the hogs alleged to have been stolen. On June 26, 1903, defendant sold to Collins Brothers twelve hogs, some of which were identified as some of the hogs alleged to have been stolen. Collins Brothers were dealers and shippers of live stock; and Dick Campbell lived on a farm near where defendant lived. When Campbell went with defendant to look at these hogs, they were in a field about a quarter of a mile from defendant's house. When Blunt heard that hogs had been purchased by Campbell and by Collins Brothers, he went to see them, described and afterward identified the hogs as belonging to him. Blunt then instituted replevin suits and succeeded in getting these hogs; and defendant paid Mr. Collins and Mr. Campbell the value of the hogs and the costs of said suits. About the last of May, one Marion Ellingsworth saw defendant driving several hogs, which answered the description of those stolen, along the road going in the direction of defendant's home and from the direction of Blunt's home. That he had talked to defendant several times about this circumstance, but that defendant would not say much; that he seemed to be uneasy. Several witnesses testified that the hogs which Blunt replevied from Campbell and from Collins Brothers were Blunt's hogs. A witness named Phipps testified that, about a month before the alleged larceny, defendant and he were walking across George Cox's field and that thew saw Blunt's hogs in said field at that time. That defendant then said that these hogs were always in somebody's field, and that somebody ought to run them off, or somebody could kill them and it would never be known. The sheriff and constable testified that, shortly after the replevin suits, a warrant was issued for the arrest of defendant, and that they made a number of efforts to find him; that they went several times to his home and to a number of other places; stayed out all night and could not find him for about eight or ten days.
On behalf of defendant, the evidence tended to prove that he had, prior to this trouble, a good reputation for honesty. Defendant, in testifying in his own behalf, admitted having possession of these hogs, but claimed to have purchased five of them from a man named Hull. He said that he met Hull on the road between Ozark and Highlandville; that Hull was a stranger to him; that Hull was driving these hogs along the road; and that he purchased them for $ 22.50 borrowing seven dollars and a half of the money from one Lincoln Hatton, who passed them. That these were some of the hogs that defendant sold to Collins Brothers about one month later. Defendant testified that he lived twelve miles from Ozark, and that he drove some hogs to that town and sold them to Collins Brothers at the stockyards. He testified that he bought a black sow and three pigs from his stepfather; and that they were the hogs that he traded to Dick Campbell, which were afterwards replevied by Blunt. Defendant claimed that he had fifteen hogs; that they got out of his pasture and wandered off a quarter of a mile towards Blunt's place; that he went after them and drove them to his home. That, in driving them home, he passed by the witness Marion Ellingsworth. Defendant denied running from the officers, and denied all knowledge of there being a warrant for his arrest. He finally admitted that he did know that there was a warrant out for him, and said that he went down to Bull creek looking for this man Hull; that Hull said he lived on Bull creek. Lincoln Hatton testified to meeting defendant and some other man on the...
To continue reading
Request your trial