Case ID: kan_123/html/0253-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Harvey, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 27,263.
    The State of Kansas, Appellee, v. Francis Rodgers, Appellant.
    
    SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
    
      Larceny — Evidence. In a prosecution for larceny, the evidence is examined and found to support the verdict of guilty.
    Larceny, 36 C. J. p. 899 n. 34.
    Appeal from Franklin district court; Hugh Means, judge.
    Opinion filed April 9, 1927.
    Affirmed.
    
      Edward T. Riling and John J. Riling, both of Lawrence, for the appellant.
    
      William A. Smith, attorney-general, and B. F. Bowers, county attorney, for the appellee.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Harvey, J.:

Francis Rodgers was duly informed against, tried and found guilty of the larceny of chickens of the value of $25. He has appealed, and contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict. This is the sole question presented. We have carefully examined the evidence as abstracted and conclude not only that there is an abundance of competent substantial evidence to support the verdict, but that no other just verdict could have been reached from the evidence. It is not necessary to detail or even to summarize the evidence.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.