Vaughn v. State, No. 770S155
| Docket Nº | No. 770S155 |
| Citation | 266 N.E.2d 219, 255 Ind. 678, 24 Ind.Dec. 554 |
| Case Date | February 10, 1971 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
Page 219
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
Ralph L. Jewell, Columbus, for appellant.
Theodore L. Sendak, Atty. Gen., Robert F. Colker, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.
HUNTER, Judge.
Appellant was charged by affidavit with the crime of theft. Trial by jury resulted in a verdict of guilty and a sentence to the Indiana State Prison for not less than one (1) nor more than ten (10) years.
The sole question raised on this appeal relates to the sufficiency of the evidence sustaining such conviction. Briefly stated, the evidence is as follows: On the morning of January 30, 1969, an employee of Farmer's Marketing Association, Columbus, Indiana, arrived at his place of employment, a saddle shop, and discovered two saddles and some other items missing. The theft was immediately reported to the police; an examination of the premises disclosed that entry had probably been accomplished by prying open a rest room window.
On February 8, 1969, appellant asked one Arthur Petro if he would assist him in selling a couple of saddles which he [255 Ind. 679] claimed to have brought back with him from California. Petro agreed and they drove to Scottsburg, Indiana, where appellant sold the two saddles for a total of one hundred and twenty five dollars ($125). Both saddles were subsequently resold by the purchasing party in Scottsburg, but one was recovered and was identified as being one of the saddles stolen from the saddle shop.
Appellant, at trial, testified that he had originally purchased the saddles on the evening of January 31, 1969 from an individual he met in a bar on his way home from work. According to appellant, he purchased the saddles for one hundred and fifty dollars ($150) with the understanding that he was to keep them for a week to enable the man to redeem them; if they were not redeemed, the saddles were to be the property of appellant.
As pointed out by appellant, the evidence in this case is wholly circumstantial and, being of the nature that it is, appellant urges its alleged insufficiency as cause for reversal. However, it has long been held that possession of stolen property shortly after the time of the theft is a circumstance from which a jury is entitled to draw an inference of guilt. Bolton v. State (1970), Ind., 261 N.E.2d 841; Finch v. State (1967), 249 Ind. 122, 231 N.E.2d 45; Spiker v. State (1966), 247 Ind. 595, 219...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gaddie v. State, No. 2-278A41
...in its application to larceny and burglary. See the dissents in Gann v. State (1971) 256 Ind. 429, 269 N.E.2d 381; Vaughn v. State (1971) 255 Ind. 678, 266 N.E.2d 219; and Bolton v. State (1970) 254 Ind. 648, 261 N.E.2d 841. 4 Furthermore, in Wilson v. State, supra, 304 Page 792 N.E.2d 824,......
-
Williams v. State, No. 1-880A220
...by circumstantial evidence. Walker v. State, supra; Miller v. State (1972), 153 Ind.App. 54, 285 N.E.2d 843; Vaughn v. State (1971), 255 Ind. 678, 266 N.E.2d 219. The specific test for the examination of circumstantial evidence has been recently restated by our Supreme Court in McAfee v. St......
-
Windle v. State, No. 2--973A208
...Melvin v. State (1968), 249 Ind. 351, 232 N.E.2d 606; Stallings v. State (1967), 249 Ind. 110, 231 N.E.2d 29.' Vaughn v. State (1971), 255 Ind. 678, 266 N.E.2d 219, See also, Braster v. State (1973), Ind., 295 N.E.2d 806; Cravens v. State (1971), 257 Ind. 381, 275 N.E.2d 4; Stepson v. State......
-
Strode v. State, No. 2-977A368
...the time of the theft is a sufficient circumstance from which a jury is entitled to draw an inference of guilt. 3 Vaughn v. State, (1971) 255 Ind. 678, 266 N.E.2d Page 188 Although the facts at bar indicate that the stolen radio was discovered, at most, only four hours after the theft occur......
-
Gaddie v. State, No. 2-278A41
...in its application to larceny and burglary. See the dissents in Gann v. State (1971) 256 Ind. 429, 269 N.E.2d 381; Vaughn v. State (1971) 255 Ind. 678, 266 N.E.2d 219; and Bolton v. State (1970) 254 Ind. 648, 261 N.E.2d 841. 4 Furthermore, in Wilson v. State, supra, 304 Page 792 N.E.2d 824,......
-
Williams v. State, No. 1-880A220
...by circumstantial evidence. Walker v. State, supra; Miller v. State (1972), 153 Ind.App. 54, 285 N.E.2d 843; Vaughn v. State (1971), 255 Ind. 678, 266 N.E.2d 219. The specific test for the examination of circumstantial evidence has been recently restated by our Supreme Court in McAfee v. St......
-
Windle v. State, No. 2--973A208
...Melvin v. State (1968), 249 Ind. 351, 232 N.E.2d 606; Stallings v. State (1967), 249 Ind. 110, 231 N.E.2d 29.' Vaughn v. State (1971), 255 Ind. 678, 266 N.E.2d 219, See also, Braster v. State (1973), Ind., 295 N.E.2d 806; Cravens v. State (1971), 257 Ind. 381, 275 N.E.2d 4; Stepson v. State......
-
Strode v. State, No. 2-977A368
...the time of the theft is a sufficient circumstance from which a jury is entitled to draw an inference of guilt. 3 Vaughn v. State, (1971) 255 Ind. 678, 266 N.E.2d Page 188 Although the facts at bar indicate that the stolen radio was discovered, at most, only four hours after the theft occur......