Court Opinion

ID: 9856889
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 07:04:48.582132+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:37:31.175372
License: Public Domain

CROCKETT, Justice.
I dissent. It seems to me that a consideration of all of the circumstances should cause all' reasonable minds to reject the idea that the defendant attempted to steal the sheep; that a fortiori reasonable minds could not find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The physical facts point inescapably to the foregoing conclusion. The defendant was a small man (about 140 pounds) and obviously somewhat limited in his other capacities. It is unlikely that he could have carried such a large sheep. He had no' other means whatsoever of transporting it. He had no weapon with which to kill it. From his manner of life and background, it is patent that he had neither the means nor the ability to butcher or make usé of the sheep. The record shows plainly that the defendant, although 32 years of age chronologically, had not attained maturity in other ways. He is unable to adjust to working and supporting himself; depends on welfare ; has never married and lives alone.
He was supinely submissive when the owner and son-in-law accosted him in the corral. The arresting officers said he offered some resistance to them and they admitted administering some punishment with a blackjack. Defendant said they repeatedly told him that he ought to “get out of town.” The trial judge manifested awareness of defendant’s social rejection when he stated that it is too bad there isn’t some place between freedom and the prison where the defendant may be placed. Reflection upon the matter of the defendant’s mental and emotional immaturity and lack of social adjustment may suggest some other motive for his being in the sheep corral,' considerably less savory to contemplate than larceny. However unseemly such reflection may be, it should not cause us to close our minds to reality and place our stamp of approval upon a conviction for a crime which it *372seems quite certainly was not committed, nor intended. It is elementary that the evidence of guilt of the offense charged must he so plain as to demonstrate the guilt of the defendant beyond reasonable doubt, and must exclude every reasonable hypothesis other than the guilt of such offense. The facts and circumstances disclosed by the •evidence here fail to meet that test, I would reverse the conviction.