Horn v. State

<p>1. Robbery &wkey;>24(5) — Evidence held sufficient to warrant conviction of robbery by putting in fear.</p> <p>Evidence held to warrant a conviction of robbery by putting in fear of life or bodily injury, notwithstanding defendant, who with his confederate was masked, did not display firearms, or in any wise injure the party robbed.</p> <p>2. Criminal law <&wkey;772(6) — Alt defenses raised should be affirmatively submitted.</p> <p>All defenses clearly raised should be affirmatively submitted.</p> <p>3. Robbery <s&wkey;27(6) — Charge that if defendant took property, but did not put owner in fear, he should b'e acquitted, properly refused.</p> <p>In a prosecution for robbery, where the court told the jury that they must find that defendant, who admitted taking property from prosecuting witness, put him in fear of life or bodily injury, and if they had a reasonable doubt they should acquit, the refusal of requested charge that, if defendant took the property, but did not put the witness in fear of life or bodily injury, they 'should acquit, held proper; the issue not being raised by the evidence.</p> <p>4. Criminal law i&wkey;>834(3) — Modification of requested charge held proper.</p> <p>In a prosecution for robbery where the evidence tended to show that defendant put the owner of the stolen property in fear, and that the owner delivered the property to him, it was proper to add to a requested special charge that if the property was taken with the consent of the owner the jury should acquit, that if the owner would not have delivered except that he was placed in fear, the taking would be without his consent.</p>