Taylor v. State
Supreme Court of Georgia
Criminal law. Pleading. Before Judge Harvey. Floyd Superior Court. May Term, 1871.' Taylor, a negro, was indicted for horse-stealing. The only description in the indictment of the animal stolen was, “ one chestnut-sorrel horse, of the value of $100 00, of the goods and chattels of Albert Berrien.” The indictment did not mention Taylor’s color. The taking was abundantly proven. The evidence described the animal only as the indictment did.
Read the full summary
Criminal law. Pleading. Before Judge Harvey. Floyd Superior Court. May Term, 1871.' Taylor, a negro, was indicted for horse-stealing. The only description in the indictment of the animal stolen was, “ one chestnut-sorrel horse, of the value of $100 00, of the goods and chattels of Albert Berrien.” The indictment did not mention Taylor’s color. The taking was abundantly proven. The evidence described the animal only as the indictment did. Taylor then stated to counsel appointed to defend him that he had “a receipt for the horse,” and produced what purported to be a bill of sale by one Sage…
1Opinion of the Court
Lochrane, Chief Justice.
1. The legal question in this case turns on the construction of the provision of the Code, section 4328. That section declares “ horse-stealing shall be denominated simple larceny, and the term horse shall include mule and ass, and each animal of both sexes, and without regard to the alterations which may be made by artificial means.” Under this law, the plaintiff in error was indicted, and the charge in the indictment was in these words: “ with the offense of simple larceny; for that the said Reuben Taylor, in the county aforesaid, on the 2d day of March, 1871, one…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Gamarra v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
- State v. CarterSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1881
- Brown v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1891
- State v. StellySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1896