Vaughan v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 21 January 1867 |
| Citation | 58 Va. 576 |
| Parties | VAUGHAN v. THE COMMONWEALTH. |
| Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
1. An indictment which charges a breaking into the house of L, with intent to steal, and stealing therefrom, is an indictment for house-breaking; and is good.
2. In such indictment, if the actual larceny is properly stated the prisoner may be found guilty of the larceny, though acquitted of the house-breaking.
3. On such an indictment, which charges that the prisoner a lot of queensware then and there feloniously did steal, take and carry away, is good after verdict as a charge of larceny though it does not specify the articles, or state that they were the property of L, or any other person.
4. A person committed on a charge of larceny by a justice, is sent in charge of a special constable and the prosecutor to jail and on the way this constable says to him, " you had as well tell all about it." After they had rode about a mile after this remark, without any other remark being addressed to the prisoner, he voluntarily says to the prosecutor, " I will tell you all about it; " and proceeds to tell how and by whom the breaking and larceny was committed. The constable was one in authority over him; and the statement is not admissible in evidence.
This was an indictment in the Circuit court of the county of Rockbridge, against George Vaughan, a freedman. The indictment contained but one count, and charged that the prisoner did on, & c., feloniously, in the night time, break and enter the plough shop of Hugh F. Lyle, with intent, the goods and chattels of the said Lyle then and there being found, feloniously to steal, take and carry away, and one lot of queensware of the value of sixty dollars, one drawing knife of the value of one dollar, one saw of the value of two dollars, and one hatchet of the value of one dollar, then and there being found, feloniously did steal, take and carry away, against the peace, & c.
On the trial of the case, the only evidence against the prisoner was his admission. It appears that the prisoner, a freedman of about seventeen years of age, with one Tom Brown, also a freedman, was arrested on the affidavit of Hugh F. Lyle, on the charge of house-breaking and larceny, and without any warning by the magistrate that they were not bound to criminate themselves, upon the confession of Tom Brown, they were committed for trial by a magistrate of Rockbridge county, and the prisoner was sent to jail in charge of Humphreys, into whose custody as special constable, he was delivered, and also in charge of Hugh F. Lyle, the prosecutor; and that on the way to the jail, Humphreys said to the prisoner, " you had as well tell all about it," referring thereby to the house-breaking and larceny charged against him. After they had rode about a mile, after Humphreys had made the remark above stated, without any other remark being addressed to the prisoner by Humphreys or Lyle he voluntarily said to Lyle, I will tell you all about it; and then proceeded to tell how the act had been done, and who were engaged in it. The prisoner, by his counsel, moved the court to exclude the evidence, on the ground that it was induced by what had occurred before the magistrate, and the remarks of Humphreys, a person in authority over the accused. But the court overruled the motion, and admitted the evidence; and the prisoner excepted.
The jury found the prisoner guilty, and fixed the term of his imprisonment in the penitentiary at two years. And the prisoner thereupon moved the court to arrest the judgment, on the ground that the indictment set forth a substantive charge of grand larceny, in stealing a lot of queensware, which is so uncertain and defective, that he could not upon any subsequent trial for stealing, & c., the specific articles of queensware, plead or prove a former acquittal or conviction. But the court overruled the motion, and entered judgment upon the verdict. And the prisoner applied to this court for a writ of error; which was awarded.
Dorman, for the prisoner.
The Attorney General, for the commonwealth.
The indictment in this case contains a single count, in which the prisoner is charged with breaking and entering, in the night time, the shop of Hugh F. Lyle with intent to steal the goods of said Hugh F. Lyle " then and there being found," and with stealing certain articles " then and there being found." Among the articles alleged to have been...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson v. Commonwealth
...as one of guilty of housebreaking, the major offense. See Speer's case, 17 Grat. 570, 58 Va. 570; Vaughan's case (Vaughan v. Com.), 17 Grat. 576, 58 Va. 576, and Myers v. Commonwealth, 132 Va. 746, 111 S.E. 463. But see Benton's case, supra, 91 Va. at pp. 791-792, 21 S.E. 495, where it is h......
-
Harris v. Commonwealth
...evidence of the intent with which the breaking was committed. The allegation of larceny is only to show the intent. Vaughan's Case, Vaughan v. Com., 17 Gratt. 576, 58 Va. 576; Wright v. Commonwealth, 82 Va. 183; Clark v. Commonwealth, 135 Va. 490, 115 S.E. 704; Staple-ton v. Commonwealth, 1......