Case Name: Stale v. Adams
Court: North Carolina Superior Court
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1797-04
Citations: 1 Hayw. 534
Docket Number: 
Parties: Stale v. Adams.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 2
Pages: 534–535

Head Matter:
Stale v. Adams.
In an indictment for horse stealing, the jury may infer from circumstances, ihat the horse was taken by the prisoner, in the disirict in which he is tried, although, he was never seen with the horse, in that dls' riot.
Indictment for horse-stealing, and not guilty pleaded ; and upon trial, the evidence was — that the horse was lost ' in Wake county, on (he 10th, and was in Adams’ possession. sixt^. fiiiles from the place, on the l6*hof thernou h. There he sold him to one of the w ifnesses, and said he had purchased him a few days in-fore, near Edenton, distant from .henee about two hundred miles.
Duffy^ for the prisoner
There must be a proof of the taking, arid that must be in the district where the priso ner is tried. In tpr? -ent rase, there is no proof of a taking in W;ke, nor was ihe* prisoner ever seen in po.s-session of the horse in this district ; the place where he sold the horse to <he witness, is in the disti ict of Salisbury. It is probable he wight have received the horse from the person that did steal him.

Opinion:
Per curiam
When a horse is stolen, and is found in possession of a man, at such a distance from the place vt-here the horse was missing, in so short a time e.ft.-r as shews he must have come directly from that place, and without, any loss of time, that is such evidence as a jury' may infer the guilt of the prisoner upon, as it raises a violent presumption against him, tlui> he Was the taker, ft is however, not conclusive. Any circumstance inducing a probability that the prisoner muy have gotten him honestly, will render it impioprr for a jury to convict,' — ' The case in Hale, where a thief was pursued, and finding himself pressed, got down, desiring a man in the road to hold-his horse till he returned, and the innocent man was taken with the horse, p¡oves how necessary it is, to use caution in convictions founded upon presumptive testimony. There is however, part of the evidence in this case, which shews probably, that the prisoner did not get the horse from another. He said lm had purchased him near Eaenfori — there was no» time sufficient to travel the horse to Edenfou, and b-mk to the place, -where the prisoner sobs him. If from circumstances the jury'infer a taking, the infer! nee also follows that he was taken at file place where missing, and that was in this district.
The jury found him guilty, and he had judgment of death.