State v. Davenport

Citations

• 38 S.C. 348
• 17 S.E. 37
• 1893 S.C. LEXIS 66

Syllabus

<p>1. Larceny — Evidence oe Value. — There being some evidence that the goods stolen were worth more than twenty dollars, the case was properly submitted to the jury ; and an exception alleging no jurisdiction in the Court of Sessions, for want of proof of grand larceny, was overruled.</p> <p>2. Circumstantial Evidence — Suggestion to Judge.. — -There was no error in charging that circumstantial “testimony must not only be consistent with the guilt of the person charged, but inconsistent with any other reasonable supposition,” a change in phraseology not having been requested at the time.</p> <p>3. Indefinite Exception. — An exception, that the judge “failed to define what constitutes a reasonable doubt in a sufficiently clear and distinct manner,” is too indefinite an allegation of error to be considered.</p> <p>4. Larceny — Felonious Appropriation. — Where the goods of another are taken and carried away without felonious intent, but afterwards feloniously appropriated, the crime of larceny becomes complete.</p> <p>5. New Trial — Facts—Appeal.—The refusal of a motion for a new trial, based on questions of fact in a law case, is not appealable.</p>