Rahe, Jr. v. State
Per Curiam. Appellants George and William Rahe, who are brothers, were convicted by the court, sitting without a jury, of breaking into a tavern with intent to commit a felony (larceny of 510 goods and chattels of the value of $100 or more) and sentenced to terms of eight years and six years, respectively. They argue on appeal that there was insufficient evidence of felonious intent and that the sentences given them amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. There was evidence that George said to William he wished he could get his wife some money for winter clothes, that George told his wife he was going to get her some money in the tavern, that William agreed to break in with George, and that almost immediately thereafter they broke three doors to gain entry.
When they were found in the place by the police, George had three bottles of whisky in his arms, a coin changing machine was on the floor, as were packs of cigarettes, scattered about, and William had a bottle of wine in his pocket. The customary location of the coin machine and the cigarettes was behind the bar. Appellants say the value of the articles found on them was less than $100, as concededly it was, and that the measure of what they intended to steal must be what they did steal. The test urged is the most precise but it is not exclusive.
The proof of the requisite felonious intent need not be direct but may be inferred from the
This is a preview of Rahe, Jr. v. State. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.