James v. State
39 S.E. 946, 114 Ga. 96, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 585
Opinion
An intention to steal is an essential element of the offense of larceny ; and therefore, in the trial of a person charged with this offense and whose defense was that he had taken the goods under a bona fide claim of right, it was error for the judge to refuse to submit to the jury the question of intention, and to charge that if the accused appropriated the goods he was. guilty regardless of his intention. Zee v. State, 102 Ga. 221, and cases cited.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
James v. State, 39 S.E. 946, 114 Ga. 96, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 585 (Ga. 1901).
39 S.E. 946 (James v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fox v. State
105 S.E.2d 368 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1958)
Walker v. State
72 S.E.2d 774 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Moyers v. State
197 S.E. 846 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
Musgrove v. State
63 S.E. 538 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1909)