Tines v. Commonwealth

Decision Date11 December 1903
Citation77 S.W. 363
PartiesTINES v. COMMONWEALTH.
CourtKentucky Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, Graves County.

"Not to be officially reported."

Tom Tines was convicted of crime, and appeals. Reversed.

B. C Seay and Saml. H. Crossland, for appellant.

Clifton J. Pratt, for the Commonwealth.

BARKER J.

The appellant, Tom Tines, was indicted by the grand jury of Graves county, charged with the offense of feloniously breaking into the warehouse of Will Ryburn, and taking and carrying away therefrom one set of buggy harness, the personal property of Ryburn. Upon trial he was convicted, and sentenced to one year in the penitentiary.

It was conclusively shown by the commonwealth that Ryburn's warehouse or barn was feloniously broken into, and his harness stolen therefrom, in July, 1901, and that about a year afterward the harness was found in the possession of one Hicks. The only evidence in any way tending to connect appellant, Tines, with the affair, is his own affidavit which the acting county attorney procured from him under the guise of using it as evidence against the unknown perpetrators of the crime. This affidavit is as follows "T. J. Tines, being sworn, states: 'Last fall I went to see one of the Mangrums--I think his name was Ed--about buying some hogs to fatten, and I met a man here at the church southwest of Boaz Station, who said he had sold his buggy, and wanted to sell his harness. He had the harness in his hack or buggy. Said he wanted to sell me a pair of harness. I told him that I didn't particular need the harness, and he said he would sell me a pair cheap. I told him that, while I didn't particularly need a pair, I would buy a pair. He offered to sell them to me for five dollars. I finally bought them at that figure, and paid him the money for them. I think probably I had the harness more than a month when I sold them to Hicks, but I am not sure as to the time. I was coming towards home when I met the man that I got the harness from. He was traveling south, I think. He was a medium-sized negro. Seemed to be a middle-aged man. Don't know that I ever met him before or not. I traded it to U.S. Hicks for a double-barreled shotgun-- breech-loading shotgun. I give him seven dollars to boot. This trade took place with Hicks some time after Christmas --something near a month after Christmas. I got the gear some time in the fall from the negro. Couldn't tell when. Don't know the month. Couldn't say whether it was the fore part or the latter part of the fall. Don't know whether it was in the middle of the fall or not. Don't know whether it was in September, October, or November. Can't...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Com. v. Edwards
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • December 30, 1993
    ...Priest v. Indiana, 270 Ind. 449, 386 N.E.2d 686 (1979); People v. Hampton, 394 Mich. 437, 231 N.W.2d 654 (1975); and Tines v. Commonwealth, 77 S.W. 363 (Ky.1903).Several jurisdictions have adopted the approach which I recommend herein: that although giving the charge over a defendant's obje......
  • Marcum v. Com.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • June 23, 1972
    ...29 S.W. 616, 16 Ky.Law Rep. 509; or to single out specific facts or groups of facts and give them undue importance, Tines v. Commonwealth, 77 S.W. 363, 25 Ky. Law Rep. 1233; Murphy v. Commonwealth, 205 Ky. 493, 266 S.W. 33; Urban v. Commonwealth, 196 Ky. 775, 245 S.W. 852. Other courts take......
  • Com. v. Buiel
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • April 26, 1984
    ...an instruction over the defendant's objection. See, e.g., Russell v. State, 240 Ark. 97, 99-100, 398 S.W.2d 213 (1966); Tines v. Commonwealth, 77 S.W. 363, 364 (Ky.1903); People v. Hampton, 394 Mich. 437, 231 N.W.2d 654 (1975). Other States have stated such a rule in dicta. See State v. Kim......
  • Griffin v. State of California, 202
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • April 28, 1965
    ...on Defendant's Failure to Take the Stand, 57 Yale L.J. 145. 9 See, e.g., State v. Pearce, 56 Minn., 226, 57 N.W. 652, 1065; Tines v. Commonwealth, 77 S.W. 363, 25 KyL.Rep. 1233; Hanks v. Commonwealth, 248 Ky. 203, 58 S.W.2d 394. 10 It should be noted that the defendant's counsel did not req......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT