Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

STATE v. HARRIS.

BOYCE, J.

, sitting.

Earle D. Willey, Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State.

John D. Hawkins, of Dover, for accused.

Albert Harris was indicted for operating a motor vehicle of another without the consent of the owner or of the person having the motor vehicle in charge, against the statute. Rev. Code 1915, § 3583. Verdict guilty.

BOYCE, J. charged the jury in part: This indictment alleges that Albert Harris, did, on the 16th day of April, of the present year, in East Dover hundred, in this county, unlawfully take and operate the motor vehicle, to wit, an automobile, belonging to Irma Gibbs, of East Dover hundred in this county, without the consent of the owner, and with out the consent of Benjamin Gibbs, of East Dover hundred, who was then and there in charge of the said motor vehicle.

The indictment is found under section 3583, Rev. Code 1915, which provides that whoever shall take and operate the motor vehicle of another without the consent of the owner thereof, or the person having the same in charge, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

The sole question for your determination is whether, or not, Albert Harris did, as charged in the indictment, take and operate, on or about the time laid in the indictment, a certain motor vehicle, the property of Irma Gibbs, the same being in the possession of Benjamin Gibbs, without the consent of the owner, or of her father, Benjamin Gibbs. If you find he did, he violated the statute, regardless of the purpose he had in using the automobile. The fact that the accused had been permitted, or allowed, at times, to drive the automobile to the railroad station to meet some member of the family, did not give the consent of the owner, or person in charge of the car, to drive it at other times to other places. Consent within the meaning of the statute implies authority to drive another's car, it requires the sanction on the part of the owner, or person in charge of the car, to another to drive it.

Verdict guilty.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

State v. Harris
(Apr 20, 1921)