State v. Vane

Citations

• 105 Wash. 421
• 178 P. 456
• 1919 Wash. LEXIS 596

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law—Continuance—Conviction of Perjury—Effect. The continuance of a criminal case against one convicted of perjury until he had obtained a reversal thereof is properly denied; since Rem. Code, § 1212, providing that any person convicted of perjury shall not be a competent witness unless the judgment is reversed, does not deny the right under Const., art. 1, § 22, to testify in one’s own behalf.</p> <p>Larceny (6)—Information—Sufficiency. An information sufficiently charges the offense of horse stealing by one assisting therein, where the offense is charged in the language of the applicable portion of Rem. Code, § 2601, defining larceny, and of §§ 2007, 2260, providing that no distinction shall exist between principal and accessories, who may be proceeded against as principals, and where it enables a person of common understanding to know what is intended.</p> <p>Criminal Law (161)—Evidence—Testimony of Accomplices. In a prosecution for larceny, evidence is competent against an accessory that the principal, who admitted his guilt, drove the team to H. and there sold them, when such evidence would have been competent against the principal.</p> <p>Same (27)—Jurisdiction — Locality of Offense — Accessory in Another State. Under Rem. Code, § 2254, subdiv. 3, providing for the punishment of one .who, being out of the state, counsels, procures or abets another to commit a crime in this state, evidence is admissible of a conversation had with accused in another state, after full agreement and plans for the theft had been made in this state.</p> <p>Criminal Law (101)—Evidence—Res Gestae—Subsequent Conduct. Upon a prosecution for larceny by an accessory, evidence that defendant had aided the principal in his defense of alibi on prosecution for the same larceny is admissible as part of the res gestae.</p> <p>Larceny (12)—Variance. A fatal variance in charging the theft of horses belonging to C. Brothers is not shown by evidence of one of the firm who answered “I was