Bargesser v. State

Plaintiff in error, who will hereinafter be referred to as the defendant, was convicted of the larceny of one Ford coupe, the property of A. Sillin.

On writ of error to review the judgment of conviction the sole contention of the defendant is that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict.

To sustain the judgment of conviction the State relies upon the rule heretofore announced by this Court in McDonald v. State, 56 Fla. 74, 47 South. Rep. 485, that a verdict of guilty of larceny may be found from the unexplained possession of goods recently stolen. The guilt of the accused does not…