People v. Fly

Citations

• 107 Cal. 497
• 40 P. 805
• 1895 Cal. LEXIS 782

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law—Embezzlement—Consistency of Finding—Support of Verdict—Venue.—Where a defendant, accused of the crime of embezzlement of a horse, wagon, and harness in the county in which they were received, is proved to have sold and traded off the horse in another county, but to have retained the wagon and harness which were found in his possession in the county where the horse was sold, a verdict finding the defendant guilty of embezzling the horse in the county in which the horse, wagon, and harness were all originally received, and not referring to the wagon and harness, will not be set aside upon the ground of inconsistency of the jury in not finding the defendant guilty of embezzling all of the property described, nor upon the ground that the effect of the verdict is to show that the defendant was prosecuted in the wrong county.</p> <p>Id.—Place of Embezzlement—Completion of Offense—Sale of Horse. The offense of embezzlement in the county where the horse was received was complete the moment it was taken with intent wrongfully to appropriate it, regardless of the subsequent removal of the property to another county and the sale of the horse therein.</p>