People v. Shaunding

Michigan Supreme Court

People v. Shaunding

255 N.W. 770, 268 Mich. 218, 1934 Mich. LEXIS 775

Michigan Supreme Court·Decided July 2, 1934·No. Docket No. 113, Calendar No. 37,786.·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

The trial court was in error in excluding testimony offered by the respondent as to his belief that he had the right to take the property in question from the place from which it was taken.

"The felonious intent is an essential and inseparable ingredient in every larceny, and if a person takes property under a claim of right, however unfounded, he has not committed larceny." People v. Hillhouse, 80 Mich. 580, 586.

The judgment is reversed, and a new trial is granted.

NELSON SHARPE, C.J., and POTTER, NORTH, FEAD, WIEST, BUTZEL, and EDWARD M. SHARPE, JJ., concurred. *Page 220

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

The trial court was in error in excluding testimony offered by the respondent as to his belief that he had the right to take the property in question from the place from which it was taken.

"The felonious intent is an essential and inseparable ingredient in every larceny, and if a person takes property under a claim of right, however unfounded, he has not committed larceny." People v. Hillhouse, 80 Mich. 580, 586.

The judgment is reversed, and a new trial is granted.

NELSON SHARPE, C.J., and POTTER, NORTH, FEAD, WIEST, BUTZEL, and EDWARD M. SHARPE, JJ., concurred. *Page 220

People v. Shaunding, 255 N.W. 770, 268 Mich. 218, 1934 Mich. LEXIS 775 (Mich. 1934).

Pincite

255 N.W. 770 (People v. Shaunding) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related