Case Name: Gilbert v. Steadman
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1792-03
Citations: 1 Root 403
Docket Number: 
Parties: Gilbert v. Steadman.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 403–404

Head Matter:
Gilbert v. Steadman.
The courts in this state have not jurisdiction to try a theft laid to have been committed in another state.
In a prosecution for theft the jury must find the value of the goods stolen. '
Qui Tam prosecution for stealing a quantity of goods from the plaintiffs shop in Mansfield in the county of Bristol, and state of Massachusetts, in company with one Mount and his wife, and for receiving and concealing them knowing them to be stolen; to the value of £32 lawful money.
Plea — Rot guilty. Issue to the jury.
Question' — 'Whether the plaintiff conld he a witness as he was interested in the event of the suit.

Opinion:
By the Court.
Prom the necessity of the case he may he admitted to testify to 'the loss of the goods, and to the identity of them. The jury found the defendant guilty, and £90 damages.
Motion in arrest — That the declaration is insufficient, for neither the stealing of the goods, or the concealment of them is laid to have been in this state. 2d. The verdict has not fotmd the value of the goods stolen or concealed, but only a round sum in damages.
Judgment" — -That the motion in arrest is sufficient upon both exceptions. The crime charged was committed in the state of Massachusetts, and out of the jurisdiction of this court. It is the province of the jury to find the value of the goods stolen, and of the court to render judgment for treble the value by way of penalty.