Williams v. State, 1364
| Decision Date | 13 January 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 1364,1364 |
| Citation | 117 So.2d 548 |
| Parties | Quentin Earl WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nance & Poling, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and Irving B. Levenson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Coral Gables, for appellee.
Sole issue in the determination of this cause is whether or not there was adequate proof of corpus delicti of larceny to justify the admission into evidence of an oral confession by the defendant.
The defendant Williams, and Kenneth Clayton Wallace were charged with stealing goods valued in excess of $100 belonging to Arthur J. Rose, doing business as Rose Cement Supply Company, on January 17, 1959. A third defendant, Charles Porter, was charged with receiving the stolen property on the same date. The three causes were consolidated for trial. During the trial, the State nolle prossed the case against Charles Porter; and at the close of the trial, the jury found Kenneth C. Wallace not guilty. Thus, this appeal concerns only Williams.
The record indicates that up to approximately one month prior to the date of the alleged crime, Williams had been employed by Rose Cement Supply Company as a contract hauler. The business was a partnership, operated in Broward County, selling cement from a centrally located sales office and warehouse, but maintaining its larger stocks at the port in that county. Testimony established that, on the date of the alleged crime, the defendant Williams appeared with his truck at the warehouse and that his truck was loaded with some one hundred eighty bags of Snocrete, a product for which the owner was the exclusive distributor in that area. The business custom and procedure required that the dispatcher issue delivery slips in quadruplicate, the original being retained in the office and the remaining copies being given to the hauler to be receipted by the consignee. The employee who loaded the defendant's truck testified that he saw no delivery slip given to the defendant at the time of the loading, although such slip could have been given outside his presence. No record was found of the issuance of such slips for the date of the alleged theft.
Snocrete was found in the storage yard of a consumer. This Snocrete could not, however, be identified as having been the property of Mr. Rose. The consumer, Mr. Osborne, testified that he purchased one hundred thirty bags of Snocrete which were delivered by defendant Williams and for which he paid $1.50 per bag, although the general price at that time was $2.00 per bag. Mr. Osborne was called by telephone by an unidentified person and asked if he could use some cement. He did testify that no ticket was given him and that he did not know from whom the property was acquired other than that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hodges, 62-765
...State ( Fla. ) 117 So. 699.' Also holding that admissions may combine with other evidence to prove the corpus delicti are Williams v. State, Fla.App.1960, 117 So.2d 548, and Harper v. State, Fla.App.1962, 141 So.2d 606. In the latter, in an opinion by Judge Shannon speaking for the second d......
-
Nelson v. State, 78-2086
...See, e. g., Gantling v. State, 41 Fla. 587, 26 So. 737 (1899); Holland v. State, 39 Fla. 178, 22 So. 298 (1897); Williams v. State, 117 So.2d 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960). In each of these cases, the so-called "confession" was in literal terms just that, i. e., an accused directly "confessed" the......
-
McQueen v. State, 72--777
...of the analogous crime of larceny our Courts have stated that this definition includes an element of guilty intent. In Williams v. State, Fla.App.1960, 117 So.2d 548, 549, the Second District 'The corpus delicti in the charge of larceny consists of two elements: (1) that the property was lo......
-
American Fire & Cas. Co. v. Sunny South Aircraft Service, Inc.
...of Appeal, Second District, and this Court in the following cases: Canada v. State, 139 So.2d 753 (Fla.App.2nd 1962); Williams v. State, 117 So.2d 548 (Fla.App.2nd 1960); Groover v. State, 82 Fla. 427, 90 So. 473, 26 A.L.R. 373 (1921); Phoenix Assur. Co., Limited, of London v. Eppstein, 73 ......
-
The anatomy of Florida's corpus delicti doctrine.
...1948) (arson); Franqui v. State, 699 So. 2d 1312, 1317 (Fla. 1997), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 1337 (1998) (robbery); Williams v. State, 117 So. 2d 548, 549, (Fla. 2d D.C.A. 1960) (theft/ larceny); Smith v. State, 566 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 2d D.C.A. 1990) (dealing in stolen property); Baxter v. Sta......