State v. Odell
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Yamhill county. The appellant was jointly indicted with one Moran for the crime of larceny in a store. Moran not being in custody, the appellant was tried separately. Upon the trial the district attorney called only three witnesses on behalf of the state: William George, L. 0. Forest, and James Fowler, and no testimony was introduced on the part of the defendant except as to the general reputation of the witness, George, for the purposes of impeachment.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Yamhill county. The appellant was jointly indicted with one Moran for the crime of larceny in a store. Moran not being in custody, the appellant was tried separately. Upon the trial the district attorney called only three witnesses on behalf of the state: William George, L. 0. Forest, and James Fowler, and no testimony was introduced on the part of the defendant except as to the general reputation of the witness, George, for the purposes of impeachment. William George testified, in substance, that abouif the time charged in the indictment, he (witness) and defendants Odell and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Boise, J.:
All the evidence in this case is set out in the bill of exceptions, and we think it appears from the testimony of the witness, William George, that he was an accomplice with Moran ánd Odell in the commission of the alleged crime. He says: “Moran went in and carried out the property named in the indictment, while he (the witness) and defend*33ant Odell watched on the outside to see if any one was watching them.” Such a participation in the commission of the crime would make him an accomplice. (1 Bouvier Law Dictionary, 52.) The term in its fullness includes in its meaning…
2Cited by11 opinions
- State v. ReynoldsOregon Supreme Court · 1938
- State v. ScottOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- State v. TownsendOregon Supreme Court · 1890
- State v. MossOregon Supreme Court · 1919
- State v. CoffeyOregon Supreme Court · 1937
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.