Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James R. Mitchell, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1901-10-04
Citations: 168 N.Y. 604
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James R. Mitchell, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 168
Pages: 604–610

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James R. Mitchell, Appellant.
Crimes—Place op Trial. The power to change the place of trial for convenience of witnesses, upon' the application of the defendant, should he conferred upon the proper court in all criminal actions where the indictment alleges that the crime was committed partly in one county and partly in another, or in any case arising under section 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. .
People v. Mitchell, 49 App. Div. 531, affirmed.
(Argued June 13, 1901;
decided October 4, 1901.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered March 20, 1900, affirming a judgment rendered at a Trial Term upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of grand larceny in the second degree.
The defendant was indicted by the grand jury of Erie county for “ the crime of grand larceny in the second degree committed as follows, to wit: That the said James R. Mitchell did, on the 17th day of August, in the year 1899, at the city of Buffalo, in the county of Erie, become the bailee and agent of Elmer B. Allen, and as such bailee and agent then and there received into his possession, custody and control certain goods, chattels and personal property of the said Elmer B. Allen, the true owner thereof, to wit: one horse, of the value of fifty dollars; one buggy, of the value of thirty dollars; one set of harness, of the value of ten dollars. That thereafter, and while the said James R. Mitchell still continued in possession of such personal property, received, as aforesaid, and the said James R. Mitchell having caused the said property to be brought to the town of Lewiston, in the county of Niagaz’a, did, on the 18th day of August, in the year 1899, at the town of Lewiston aforesaid, with force and arms, feloniously appropriate the said goods, chattels and personal property to his own use, with intent to deprive and defraud the said Elmer B. Allen of the same, and of the use and benefit thereof, and the same goods/chattels and personal property of the said Elmer B. Allen, did then and thereby feloniously steal, against the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace of the People of the State of New York and their dignity.”
The issue formed by the defendant’s plea of not guilty when tried in the Supreme Court resulted in a verdict of “ guilty as charged in the indictment.” His counsel thereupon moved “ for an arrest of judgment on the ground that this court has no jurisdiction in this case,” but the motion was denied and he was sentenced to state’s prison for two years. Upon appeal to the Appellate Division the judgment of conviction was affirmed, two of the justices dissenting, and the appellant now comes here.
Damid Gray for appellant.
Thomas Penney and G. W. Siohmon for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We think the judgment appealed from should be affirmed for the reasons given by the learned Appellate Division in its opinion.
While it does not appear to have been of any importance in this case, it may be of great importance in some cases that the power to change the place of trial for convenience of witnesses, upon the application of the • defendant, should be conferred upon the proper court in all criminal actions where the indictment alleges that the crime was committed partly in one county and partly in another, or in any case arising under section 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. We, therefore,^dopt the suggestion to that effect made by Judge Cullen in his dissenting opinion.
The judgment of conviction should be affirmed.