Judges: BUFORD, J. —
Attorneys: Joseph S. White, for Plaintiff in Error;
J. B. Johnson, Attorney General, and Roy Campbell, Assistant, for Defendant in Error.
Filed: Feb. 12, 1927
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: In this case the appellant was informed against in the Criminal Court of Record of Palm Beach County, Florida, charged with the offense of larceny of an automobile alleged to have been the property of one Mary C. Bevers. The defendant pleaded not guilty and was convicted *Page 249 of grand larceny and sentenced to pay a fine of $500.00 and costs, or in default thereof, to serve a period of twelve months in the county jail. The probative force of the evidence shows that the plaintiff in error was
Summary: In this case the appellant was informed against in the Criminal Court of Record of Palm Beach County, Florida, charged with the offense of larceny of an automobile alleged to have been the property of one Mary C. Bevers. The defendant pleaded not guilty and was convicted *Page 249 of grand larceny and sentenced to pay a fine of $500.00 and costs, or in default thereof, to serve a period of twelve months in the county jail. The probative force of the evidence shows that the plaintiff in error was ..
More
It is usually held that the general owner of a chattel may be guilty of larceny by feloniously taking the chattel from a conditional vendee, who has paid a portion of the purchase price and is in lawful possession of the chattel, with intent to fraudulently or feloniously deprive such vendee of his interest or estate therein. But a felonious intent, and a taking without the consent of the owner, are indispensable elements of larceny. In this case, the taking by the defendant, the general owner of the chattel, was with the consent of the conditional vendee, which consent is evidenced by the
solemn written contract between those parties. The contract provides that in the event the purchase price was not paid as therein agreed — and the evidence shows that it was not — the vendor (defendant), "has the right to take possession of said automobile without any process of law." The element of a felonious taking without the consent of the conditional vendee being absent, the act of the defendant vendor is not larceny.
WHITFIELD, TERRELL AND BROWN, J. J., concur.
