Rose v. State of Arizona
This text of 85 P.2d 53 (Rose v. State of Arizona) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Joe Rose was accused by the county attorney of Maricopa county of grand larceny, alleged to have been committed as follows:
“The said Joe Rose on or about the 21st day of October, 1937, and before the filing of this information, at and in the County of Maricopa, State of Arizona, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, steal, take and drive away one certain motor vehicle, to-wit, one Ford Coach Automobile, Engine No. AB5010332, Serial No. AB5010332, the personal property of one Angel Portillo.”
He was tried before a jury which returned a verdict of guilty, and was sentenced to imprisonment in the state prison for a term of years. An appeal was taken to this court, and the record and reporter’s transcript of the evidence at the trial filed, but nothing further was done, and the Attorney General moved that the case be submitted on the record. Under these circumstances, we examine the record for fundamental error only.
The information properly charges grand larceny; the jury returned a verdict finding defendant guilty of that crime upon evidence, which was sufficient *22 to sustain the verdict, and the sentence imposed by tbe court was according to law.
No fundamental error appearing, tbe judgment is affirmed.
MoALISTER, C. J., and ROSS and LOCKWOOD, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
85 P.2d 53, 53 Ariz. 20, 1938 Ariz. LEXIS 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rose-v-state-of-arizona-ariz-1938.