Drummond v. State

60 So. 138, 103 Miss. 221
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1912·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Cook, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This defendant was tried and convicted upon an indictment charging him with receiving property, knowing the same to have been stolen.

On the trial, the court gave the following instruction to the jury: “The court instructs the jury that guilty knowledge is not often capable of direct proof; that it is a conclusion to be drawn from all the facts and circumstances in the case, and if the jury are satisfied from the facts and circumstances that the defendant received or bought the meat, and converted it to his own use, when he had a knowledge, or had good reason to believe, it was stolen property, then they will find him guilty. ” The giving of this instruction was clearly erroneous; but we think, from all the testimony in this case, including that of the defendant himself, no honest and reasonable jury could have rendered any other verdict than the one rendered in the case. *

The ease is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Drummond v. State, 60 So. 138, 103 Miss. 221 (Mich. 1912).

60 So. 138 (Drummond v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bennett v. State
211 So. 2d 520 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1968)
Pettus v. S Tate
27 So. 2d 536 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1946)
Gordon v. State
128 So. 769 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1930)
State v. Ebbeler
222 S.W. 396 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1920)
Kasle v. United States
233 F. 878 (Sixth Circuit, 1916)