Commonwealth v. Steimling

Citations

• 156 Pa. 400
• 27 A. 297
• 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1363

Syllabus

<p>[Marked, to bo reported.]</p> <p>Criminal law — Acquittal of felony — Review—New trial — Twice in jeopardy.</p> <p>The Supreme Court will not reverse a judgment on a verdict of acquittal in a trial for felony, although the acquittal was the result of error committed by the judge in stating the law to the jury, where the commonwealth does not ask for a new trial.</p> <p>Not decided whether a new trial can be ordered where a defendant has been acquitted upon an indictment charging a felony.</p> <p>Larceny — Trespass—Coal.</p> <p>Thing’s pertaining to realty can only be the subject of larceny, when the act by which they are severed does not constitute “ one and the same continuous act,” as the act of asportation.</p> <p>Larceny of coal — Animus furandi.</p> <p>On an indictment for larceny it appeared that the prosecutor was the owner of a farm which was crossed by a creek. Along the shores and in the bed of the creek, particles of coal and culm had been deposited, being carried down by the current and floods from mines further up the stream. Defendant, descending the stream in a flat boat, entered upon the lands of the prosecutor, and began to gather coal from the surface. He was provided with a scoop or shovel made of strong wire or iron rods with which he gathered up the coal. The sand and gravel passed through the meshes of the scoop, leaving the pieces of coal within it. When the gravel was all sifted out, the clean coal was emptied upon the flat boat. This process was continued until a boat load was obtained. The boat was then towed or pushed to some bins belonging to defendant, and afterwards delivered to purchasers, or taken for consumption from the bins. Held, that defendant was not merely a trespasser, but was guilty of a carrying away and an actual conversion, and that the question of the existence of an animus furandi was for the jury.</p>