From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jan 16, 1958
101 S.E.2d 91 (Ga. Ct. App. 1958)

Opinion

36959.

DECIDED JANUARY 16, 1958.

Larceny. Before Judge Pharr. Fulton Superior Court. October 4, 1957.

Slaton Holt, Lewis R. Slaton, Jr., for plaintiff in error.

Paul Webb, Solicitor-General, Thomas R. Luck, Jr., Eugene L. Tiller, contra.


It is true that a confession, even though freely and voluntarily made, is not sufficient to convict a defendant for larceny in the absence of other corroborative evidence. However, in the instant case there is ample corroborative evidence to sustain the verdict.

DECIDED JANUARY 16, 1958.


The defendant was convicted in the Superior Court of Fulton County on three counts. Count _________ reads as follows: "The jurors . . . charge and accuse Langston H. Davis with the offense of felony, for that the said accused . . . did from the storehouse and place of business of the Simmons Company, a house in said State and county being then and there found, wrongfully, fraudulently and privately take, steal and carry away with intent to steal the same, a certain due bill, paper and receipt numbered A-34151, dated September 29, 1954, listing the name of the accused as purchaser of merchandise in the amount of $88.50, said due bill, paper and receipt being the value of $88.50 and the property of the said Simmons Company . . ."

Count 18 reads the same as count ________ hereinabove except for the number of the invoice and the date and the amount is shown to be $157.59.

Count 19 reads the same as count ________ hereinabove except for the number of the invoice and the date and the amount is shown to be $39.40.

The evidence shows that the defendant was an employee of the Simmons Company. The case was submitted to a Judge of the Superior Court of Fulton County to pass on the law and facts, without a jury. The defendant put up no evidence and made no statement. Counsel for the defendant filed a motion for a new trial on the general grounds only. The court overruled this motion. It is on this judgment that the case is here for review.

The evidence reveals substantially that it was the custom of the Simmons Company to permit their employees to purchase articles from the company in their own names at the regular wholesale price and to resell the articles to third persons. When an employee purchased an article, the Simmons Company retained the invoice. The invoice showed the articles purchased and to whom the articles were shipped. An original invoice and seven or eight duplicates were made of each sale. The Simmons Company became suspicious of the conduct of the defendant when it was discovered by another employee that the defendant had numerous carbon copies of invoices in his desk. An audit showed these invoices represented goods which the defendant had bought in his name and for which he had not accounted to the company. The evidence reveals further that when the defendant purchased any one of the articles he would go down to the company office early and secure the duplicate invoices and thus prevent bookkeeping records being made against him. In the audit it was discovered that the defendant had obtained goods without paying for same, over the years from 1940 through 1954, the goods being valued at more than $6,000. When the defendant was faced with the situation by company officials he gave a written confession to the company, freely and voluntarily as follows: "I Langston H. Davis, do hereby state that over a period from 1950 to 1954 I took, and converted to my own use, funds rightly belonging to the Simmons Company, Atlanta, Georgia, in the amount of $6,500.64.

"It is my wish that the two retirement checks described as follows — (1) Connecticut General Life Insurance Company in the amount of $179.24 and (2) Chase National Bank in the amount of $653.77 — be applied on the above indebtedness. I make this statement of my own free will without any duress or promise of reward.

"/s/ Langston H. Davis Witnessed."


Counsel for the defendant contends for a reversal on the ground that the only evidence against the defendant is his uncorroborated confession and that such is insufficient as a matter of law to convict the defendant. We disagree with counsel as to this view of the case. The invoices (showing goods purchased and the amount thereof) set forth in the indictment, were proved to have been stolen from the files of the company, and destroyed. This was one item of evidence that is contained in the written confession of the defendant. Some invoices were discovered in the desk of the defendant, before he made his confession. The invoices which the defendant took fraudulently from the files of the company evidenced the wholesale price of the goods which the defendant converted to his own use without paying anything for them. We could recount many other items of evidence in corroboration of the defendant's written confession of his guilt, but it is apparent to us that the evidence as a whole, including the method of the fraudulent operations of the defendant against the company, is clearly sufficient to convict.

Counsel for the defendant contends also that the State failed to prove any value other than that given in the defendant's written confession. All the records of the case tend to show that the invoices which represented stolen goods also represented the value of the goods which the defendant purchased in his own name, and sold, receiving money therefor, and that he then stole the invoices so that the Simmons Company could not send a statement for payment to the defendant.

Counsel for the defendant in his contentions makes an effort to maintain that the only thing the defendant stole from the company was the pieces of paper on which the invoices were made. We can not agree with this reasoning.

The trial court sentenced the defendant to serve twelve months on the public works on each of three counts, the sentences to run concurrently. There was a fourth count but the record does not disclose that the judge passed on that count.

The court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed. Townsend and Carlisle, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Davis v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jan 16, 1958
101 S.E.2d 91 (Ga. Ct. App. 1958)
Case details for

Davis v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVIS v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Jan 16, 1958

Citations

101 S.E.2d 91 (Ga. Ct. App. 1958)
101 S.E.2d 91

Citing Cases

Simmons v. State

The checks which were drawn in an amount in excess of $300 can also be included in the total value to show…