Opinion
No. 27672.
February 18, 1929.
CRIMINAL LAW. Larceny. "Corpus delicti" of crime of larceny is unlawful and felonious taking and carrying away of property without consent of owner, confession in connection with proof of corpus delicti is sufficient to establish larceny.
The "corpus delicti" of the crime of larceny is the unlawful and felonious taking and carrying away of property of another without the consent of the owner. When the corpus delicti is established, then a defendant's connection with the crime may be established by confession alone.
APPEAL from circuit court of Prentiss county, HON.C.P. LONG, Judge.
Friday Windham, for appellants.
The corpus delicti of the crime charged against Crabb consists in his causing or procuring Harris to kill the hog for his (Crabb's) use and benefit and his getting the same. The only evidence in the record to this effect is the testimony of the witness Hughes, who claims that Crabb admitted this to him. This did not warrant the court in giving the above instructions, because the corpus delicti cannot be proven alone by the confession of accused — it must be proven aliunde the confession of accused. Jenkins v. State, 41 Miss. 582; Pitts v. State, 43 Miss. 472; Stanley v. State, 82 Miss. 498; Murray v. State, 104 Miss. 296; Barron v. State, 111 Miss. 231; Rayborn v. State, 115 Miss. 730; Floyd v. State, 138 Miss. 697, 103 So. 368.
Rufus Creekmore, Assistant Attorney-General, J.A. Cunningham, and J.S. Finch, for the state.
Both the defendant Crabb and the defendant Harris were indicted for stealing a hog. The corpus delicti is the stealing of the hog. The evidence of the witness Burlin Taylor, cited above, clearly shows the criminal killing and taking of the hog by Harris, and Harris' declaration to Taylor at the time as to how he expected to secretly get it out of the field by automobile at night is thoroughly corroborated by both the circumstances and the statement of Crabb. There was a conspiracy to steal a hog and the conspiracy was carried out, and the corpus delicti proven both by direct testimony and circumstantial evidence. It is not at all dependent upon the confession but upon an eyewitness with the supplementary evidence given by an array of circumstances which thoroughly complete the information as to the corpus delicti. Counsel cite Rayburn v. State, 115 Miss. 730. This is no authority as the corpus delicti in the instant case was proven by both direct and circumstantial evidence, but it can be proved wholly by circumstantial evidence, as shown in Rayburn v. State, supra. See Spears v. State, 92 Miss. 613, 46 So. 166, 16 L.R.A. (N.S.) 285, and note.
The appellants were indicted for the theft of a hog belonging to J.A. Cunningham, and were tried and convicted of that offense.
It appears that on the night of the 4th day of January, 1928, a Chevrolet automobile, near the midnight hour, passed the plantation building on J.A. Cunningham's place over a very bad road, going down into the bottom below the house. It appears that the night was cold, and the ground was in bad condition, and the operation of the automobile over that road at that place and at that time of night attracted the attention of people living on the plantation. In looking out they saw the car drive into the bottom and turn and stop for a few minutes and then come back by the same place.
On the following day, investigation disclosed that a hog had been killed because of the finding of blood and some shells where the hog had been shot. It was testified by a state witness that Dewey Harris killed the hog in the afternoon of January 4th and stated that he was going to get the hog out, and that Crabb was going to pay him a gallon of whisky for killing the hog and getting it to him. It was also testified that Crabb admitted to another state witness that he had hired Harris to steal the hog, and that he got the hog. Also, it was proved that Crabb owned a Chevrolet car of like kind as the one seen on the premises.
It is argued on appeal that proof is insufficient to sustain a conviction of Alton Crabb, and that the alleged confession of Alton Crabb was not sufficient to sustain the conviction because corpus delicti was not proved. It is contended that corpus delicti consists not only of the killing and taking away of the hog, but of Crabb's connection with it. We do not think this contention is sound. The corpus delicti consisted of the theft of the hog; the killing and taking away was sufficient evidence of corpus delicti. The confession coupled Crabb with the crime and was sufficient, taken in connection with the other circumstances in the case, to warrant his conviction by the jury.
We have examined the instructions complained of and find no reversible error in them. The judgment of conviction will be affirmed.
Affirmed.