State v. . Rights
Supreme Court of North Carolina
INDICTMENT for Larceny tried at Fall Term, 1879, of For-syth Superior Court, before Qilmer, J. The defendants,'Hiram Rights and Nathan Blum, were charged with larceny and receiving, &c., bacon and pork, the property of William- B. Peterson.
Read the full summary
INDICTMENT for Larceny tried at Fall Term, 1879, of For-syth Superior Court, before Qilmer, J. The defendants,'Hiram Rights and Nathan Blum, were charged with larceny and receiving, &c., bacon and pork, the property of William- B. Peterson. It was in evidence that on the 6th of February, 1879, the smoke-house of the prosecutor, Peterson, was broken open and three hams and other pieces of meat stolen } and a week afterwards the house of defendant, Blum, was searched under a warrant for that purpose, and a ham found therein which was identified by the prosecutor as his property and one of the…
1Opinion of the CourtAshe, J.
Larceny is a crime committed in secret, and the state in most cases is necessarily compelled to resort to circumstantial evidence to effect a .conviction of the thief. And the possession of the property shortly after the theft is the circumstance most usually relied upon. It is a general rule that whenever the property of one, which has been taken from him without his knowledge or consent, is found in the possession of another, it is encumbent on that other to prove how he came by it, otherwise the presumption is that he came by it feloniously. But in applying this rule, due attention must be…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Malachi v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
- State v. . HolbrookSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- State v. . BakerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- State v. . JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- State v. . RecordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.