State v. COLLINS

The reasoning in the majority opinion is in conflict with and'cannot he reconciled with that of the State of Ohio, State v. Driscoll, 1922, 106 Ohio St. 33, 138 N. E. 376, 378; Illinois, People v. Lewis, 252 Ill. 281, 96 N. E. 1005; California, People v. Keith, 141 Cal. 686, 75 P. 304; and Indiana, Parrett v. State, 200 Ind. 7, 159 N. E. 755; and in my opinion is not as sound and logical as that appearing in the above cited opinions. I, therefore, beg to dissent upon the grounds stated therein and the dissenting opinion in State v. Henderson, 226 S. C. 227, 84 S. E. (2d) 626.