The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1902-07-17

~
from the City Court Of Montgomery.
/. Larceny: sufficiency OF Indictment
II is no objection to an indictment for lar
ceny, which contains two counts, that in
each OF the counts the property alleged
to have been stolen Is alleged to have be
longed TO q different person. ~
q Same: same.-It Ii no ground for
demurrer to an Indictment for larceny,
that II falls to aver the Christian name
Of the owner of the property alleged to
have been stolen. and falls to aver that
the Christian name Of said alleged owner
was TO the grand jury unknown.
g. Organization 81 petit jury; defendant
not entitled to have panel completed aft
ter State challenged.--After the State has
peremptoriiy challenged several Jurors in
the organization OF a petit jury, II Is
not error for the court to require the de-
PENDANT to pass upon the remaining jur-
ors, before summoning others to supply
the place OF those who had been chal-
lenged.
4. Same; how places Of Jurors chai-
lenged supplied.-In the organization of
a jury for the trial OF felony case. 9TH
er than capital one, In the City Court
OF Montgomery, after the regular jurors
in attendance have been exhausted with
out completing the jury. the statute (Cr.
Code. Section 5012; Acts OF 1900-1eoi, p
1894. Section 9, provides that the number
required TO coniplete the Jury shall be
summoned from the qualified citizens Of
the county: and the defendant is not en-
titled to have such defici,n:y made UP
by drawing from the jury box.
6. Larceny; conspiracy: adrn'ssibil.ty Of
evidence. --On trial under ar inlictment
| for larceny. whe,e there is evidence tend
ing to show a conspiracy on the part of
"a Aafn ne ~ ~ N Dammit tna
offense charged. every act or declaration
done or madc by the defendant or any
| other OF the co-ccnspirators In connection
with and in furtherance of the common
purpose, Is competent and almissibleN In
evidence
g. Same; same: same.--On a trial UNI
der an indictment for the larceny of cat
tie, where the evidence shows that the
cattle allegei'to have been stolen were
taken from the county adjoining the one
in which the Indictment was preferred.
and were driven into the said latter coun-
ty, and that there was a conspiracy on
the part Of the defendant and others to
c Dmmit the offense. all that was said
and done by the defendant and those aid
ing him in the commission OF the offense
alon gthe route the cows were driven Is
competent and admissible In evidence as
a part Of the res gcstae.
Z. Criminal law; sufIiciency OF evidence
Of accomplice 20 authorize conviction
IL is sufficient to authorize the conviction
on the testimony of an accomplice, that
the corroborating evidence tends to con-
meet the defendant with the commission
of the crime.
g. Larceny; charge of court to jury
On trial under an indictment which
charges the defendant jointly with an
other, with having stolen eighteen cows,
a charge which fnstructs the jury that IL
they believe from the evidence beyond
reasonable doubt that the persons alleged
in the indictmtnt to have owned said cows
had eighteen or any number of cows
feloniously taken and carried away, and
that the defendant confessed that he was
one of the persons engaged in such feion-
ious taking and carrying away of said
COWS, 1t is sufffcien to authorize con-
viction Of the defendant, without regard
to the testimony Of the accomplish"
states a correct proposition of law and is
properly given at the request of the
State.
o. Grand larceny: charge of court as
to confession; suff1ciency Of evidence
On a trial under an Indictment which
charges the defendant mad another per-
so with larceny. where there Is evidence
that the defendant made confession
JIldt lie was one Oh tUc DtE5ODS AAdt tldf
committed the larceny a charge Ia free
from error and properly given at the re-
quest of the State which instructs the
jury that "A confession by the defendant,
IL one was made. Is admissible as cor
roborating evidence Of that Of an accom-
plice, and may be taken by the jury as
SUFFICIENT confederation to authorize a
conviction"
TO- Same: charge as to Albion trial
under an indictment for larceny, where
the defendant introduces evidence tend
ing to prove an alibi. a charge is free
from error and properly given at the re-
quest of the Staff which instructs the
jury that IL the jury believe from the
evidence beyond reasonable doubt that
the alibi set up in this case is simulated,
false and fraudulent, they may consider
this as a circumstance against the de-
PENDANT in connection with all the other
evidence in the case"
II. Larceny; charge to the jury.--On a
trial under an indictment for larceny,
where there is evidence tending to show
q conspiracy on the part of the defend
ants and others to commit the offense
chergcd. charges requested by the de-
PENDANT which ignore the evidence tending
to show a conspiracy and give undue
prominence to certain portions OF the evil
dence, to the exclusion Of all other evi-
dence. are erroneous and properly re-
fused.
II Same, same On trial under an n
dictment for larceny, where there is evil
dence tending to show a conspiracy on the
part of the defendant and others to COM
NIT the offense charged. proof Of the per-
sonai presence of the defendant at the
time Of the commission OF the offense Is
not necessary TO conviction.
ls Same; same.--where an Indictment
for larceny contains two counts and in
each of the counts the ownership OF the
property alleged to have been stolen is
laid in different persons. charges which
postulate an acquittal OF the defendant on
the failure to prove that either one of
the owners as alleged in the Indictment
owned all of the proptrty stolen, are err
roneous and properly refused.
IA. Same; same.-In such a case.
charge which instructs the jury that they
must believe beyond a reasonable doubt
that all OF the property stolen belonged
70 both OF the persons alleged in each
OF the counts of the indictment to be the
owners Of such property, before they can
convict the defendant. is erroneous and
properly refused.
IS Same; s3me.-Charges which are ar
gumentative. mislea Sing and invasive Of
the province of the jury are properly re-
fused.
Affirmed.
Opinion by Dowdell, J.
CARPENTER v. GREENE COUNTY.
Action against county upon interest
coupons ION bonds.-Appeal from the
Circuit Court of Greene.