State v. Ketterman

Citations

• 89 Wash. 264
• 154 P. 182
• 1916 Wash. LEXIS 674

Syllabus

<p>Receiving Stolen Goods — Information—Sufficiency—“Larceny” —Statutes. Under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 2601, defining larceny where any person, “with intent to deprive or defraud the owner thereof,” shall (1) take and drive away the property of another; or (2) shall obtain property by the aid of checks or drafts unlawfully drawn; or (3) withhold or appropriate property held in his possession as bailee, agent, etc.; or (4) withhold or appropriate property received by reason of a mistake; and (5) knowing the same to be “so appropriated” shall receive any property wrongfully appropriated, the words “so appropriated” applies to the original larceny of property specified in each and all of the preceding four sub-divisions.</p> <p>Same — Information—Sufficiency. In an information for receiving stolen property, it is not necessary to allege the facts going to constitute the original unlawful taking as would be required in a prosecution therefor.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Trial-—Challenge to Sufficiency of Evidence— Specific Objections — Necessity. A general motion to take the case from the consideration of the jury only raises the question as to whether there is any evidence tending to prove the crime charged and is insufficient to support the specific objection that the evidence was insufficient to show the accused’s connection with the crime, where there was ample evidence to show that the offense had been committed.</p>