Court Opinion

ID: 9646802
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 13:11:37.297013+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:59:06.678008
License: Public Domain

ODOM, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the reversal of appellant’s conviction, but dissent to the remand of the cause. The judgment should be reformed to reflect an acquittal for reasons stated in the opinion on original submission. The evidence is insufficient to show James For*197rest was owner of the property as alleged, Forrest was no more in authority to control the property than was any policeman on the street, who, like Forrest, had á duty to stop any fraudulent taking of property. A duty to stop theft is not equivalent to care, control and management.