Davis v. State

122 So. 579, 97 Fla. 987

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiffs in error were convicted' of the larceny of a cow. The contention made in their behalf is that there was no evidence of “taking and carrying away.” There was, however, sufficient evidence to show that the cow was butchered at the place where she was shot, and the operations necessary to prepare the beef for market. almost completed, when the plaintiffs in error were discovered and ran away. The judgment of conviction is affirmed on authority of Driggers v. State, 118 So. R. 20.

Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur.