Wilson v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Craighead Circuit Court, Jonesboro District; Frank Smith, Judge; The indictment is brought, and this case is prosecuted, under authority of § 2100, Kirby’s Digest. The essential elements of the 'crime are, the larceny by the accused of the property of another, in a foreign jurisdiction, within the statutory period of limitations, and the subsequent transportation of the same by the accused into this State.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Craighead Circuit Court, Jonesboro District; Frank Smith, Judge; The indictment is brought, and this case is prosecuted, under authority of § 2100, Kirby’s Digest. The essential elements of the 'crime are, the larceny by the accused of the property of another, in a foreign jurisdiction, within the statutory period of limitations, and the subsequent transportation of the same by the accused into this State. Since the indictment fails to allege all these essentials, it is fatally defective, and the demurrer should have been sustained. We confess error, in this: 1. Under the statute,…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
Appellant was convicted of the crime of bringing stolen property into this State, and to reverse the judgment of conviction has duly prosecuted an appeal to this court.
The testimony on the part of the State tended to show that the property was stolen by appellant in the State of Tennessee, and was brought by him into this State.
The testimony on the part of appellant tends to show that he did not steal the property, but purchased it; and that, if in fact it had been stolen, he did not know it when he bought it. Appellant was indicted under section 2100 of Kirby’s Digest, which reads as follows:
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Campbell v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1882
3Cited by2 opinions
- Sullivan v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- O'Neal v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938