Case ID: ohio-st_25/html/0668-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State of Ohio v. William E. Mann.
    Exceptions of the prosecuting attorney to the ruling of the court.
    
      Charles Townsend, prosecuting:
    Criminal Code, see. 90; Calkins v. The State, 18 Ohio St. 371; 2 Bouvier’s Law Dic. 122; Griffin v. The State, 18 Ohio St. 438; S. & C. 439, sec. 157; The State of Iowa v. Chambers, 2 Green, 308; Dawood v. The State, 1 Hunt (Miss.), 262; 4 Beach, 457; 12 Johns. 239; 4 Black. Com. 229; 3 Binney, 546; 4 Wash. 700.
   By the Court.

In an indictment for larceny, the word “ steal ” implies a carrying away; and, therefore, an indictment for larceny of a sheep, charging that the defendant did “ feloniously steal, take, and drive ” the sheep, without alleging that he drove or carried it away, sufficiently describes the offense under our statute.

Exceptions overruled.