State v. Baird
Supreme Court of Vermont
Indictment for petty larceny. Plea, nót guilty. Trial by jury at the March Term, 1905, Washington County, Rowell, 'J., presiding. Verdict guilty; judgment and sentence thereon. The respondent excepted. The ruling reviewed in the opinion, as to the admissibility of the evidence in rebuttal, was made as matter of law, and not of discretion. The opinion fully states the case.
Read the full summary
Indictment for petty larceny. Plea, nót guilty. Trial by jury at the March Term, 1905, Washington County, Rowell, 'J., presiding. Verdict guilty; judgment and sentence thereon. The respondent excepted. The ruling reviewed in the opinion, as to the admissibility of the evidence in rebuttal, was made as matter of law, and not of discretion. The opinion fully states the case. No felonious intent at the time of the taking was shown, hence the court should have directed a verdict of acquittal. Butlers v. State, 30 Tex. 367; Hill v. State, 57 Wis. 377; The Queen v. Cole, 2 Cox C. C. 340 ; Love v.…
1Opinion of the CourtMunson, J.
The respondent, a workman in the employ of Prindle & Averill and a brother-in-law of Prindle, was charged with stealing money from the partnership safe. The defence was that the money was taken by Prindle’s direction.
During Averill’s cross-examination he testified that he had never had any considerable trouble with his partner, and upon objection being made to a further inquiry, respondent’s counsel offered to show declarations and sworn statements made by the witness relative to the respondent and Prindle, and that witness had caused the arrest of the respondent and been active in the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stillwell v. FarewellSupreme Court of Vermont · 1891
- Bertoli v. E. L. Smith & Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1897
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. RiggleWyoming Supreme Court · 1956
- State v. LongSupreme Court of Vermont · 1922
- State v. RiggleWyoming Supreme Court · 1956