Jackson v. State

Henderson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The trial court, sitting without a jury, found the appellants guilty of housebreaking and the larceny of a pink refrigerator from a newly constructed house. They first attacked the convictions on the ground that there was no proof of the corpus delicti in that there was no proof of the value of the refrigerator and no proof that it was taken without the owner’s consent. Both contentions are without merit.

The State put in evidence a bill of sale showing that the refrigerator had been purchased new for $478.60 a short time before the taking. There was testimony by the president of the corporate owner that it was “brand new” and a standard make (General Electric) of 15 cubic foot capacity. From this evidence the trial court could properly find, as he did, that the value of the refrigerator was more than $100.00. As to the taking, there was evidence that the refrigerator was installed in the premises, that a few days later a pane of glass and a door lock were broken, and that the refrigerator was missing.

The loss was reported to the police and a new refrigerator purchased. The evidence of a breaking and taking was sufficient to rebut any inference of consent. The main contention in the case is that statements by each of the defendants, admitting or confessing their participation in the crime, were inadmissible because of alleged gaps in the proof of the chain of custody. The State called seven Montgomery County police officers in this connection, all of whom testified that during their various contacts with the accused ²⁷⁰ at the time of and subsequent to the arrest no promises, threats, or inducements were made and that the statements were made voluntarily.

Neither of the accused took the stand to deny this testimony, in whole or in part. The State produced the officer who made the arrest at about 5 :30 A. M. and the officers who took the accused to the station house at Silver Spring. There the accused were placed in separate rooms and