Lorton v. State
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from the St. Louis Criminal Court. 1st. That the stealing of goods at different times, of the value of 4d, 6d, and 3d, was punishable at common law as grand larceny. 1 Hawk. Pc. ch. 33, sec. 33. That if this severity was seldom practiced, it was because of the rigor of such proceeding. Ibid.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Criminal Court. 1st. That the stealing of goods at different times, of the value of 4d, 6d, and 3d, was punishable at common law as grand larceny. 1 Hawk. Pc. ch. 33, sec. 33. That if this severity was seldom practiced, it was because of the rigor of such proceeding. Ibid. That consolidation was a favorite principle of common law, both in civil and criminal cases, and that in the latter it was always adhered to, when unopposed by considerations of humanity. Id. — ibid. 2d. That if the goods of several persons are stolen at the same time,the circumstance of different…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court by
Napton, Judge.
Lorton was indicted by the grand jury of St. Louis county, for stealing the goods and chattels of Richmond Curie, and at the same time was also indicted for stealing the goods of one John B. Gibson. The defendant plead guilty to the first indictment, and to the second plead a former conviption for the same offence. It appears from the bill of exceptions, that the prisoner on the day mentioned in the indictment, was found in a room of the Missouri Hotel, in the city of St. Louis, at a late hour in the evening, and being seizedbv Richmond Curie, and'one…
2Cited by30 opinions
- Hagan v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1992
- State v. ToombsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
- Wilson v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1876
- State v. MotonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1972
- State v. ColgateSupreme Court of Kansas · 1884
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.