Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

to the place where the persons to be robbed are, in order to spy out the land and to ascertain their unprepared condition, and then signals and gives notice to his associates, is a principal in a murder committed by the latter in the course of the robbery, although he is one or two hundred yards distant when it is committed.91 And where a servant, whose duty it is to watch over goods, purposely absents himself to facilitate their theft, he is guilty as a principal.92 A person may be constructively present even though actually at a considerable distance.93 But he must at least be in such a situation that he might render assistance in some manner, not necessarily physical, in the commission of the offense.94 And he must be doing some act in furtherance of the common design.95

§ 231.Necessity for and sufficiency of participation-In general. To constitute a person a principal in the second degree or an

91 Bass v. State, 59 Tex. Cr. 186, 127 S. W. 1020.

92 State v. Poynier, 36 La. Ann. 572.

93 If he stands guard, it is immaterial how distant from the scene of the crime his vigil is maintained, provided it gives some promise of protection to those actively engaged in the commission of the offense, as where a person stays on guard in a town other than the one in which a murder actually takes place for the purpose of preventing warning being sent to the intended victim, or intercepting or attempting to intercept such warnings. State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722.

One who in pursuance of a common plan to rob a stage, gives notice to his confederates of the departure of the stage by lighting a fire, is guilty as a principal in the second degree, although the attempt to rob is committed by his confederates in another county, forty miles distant. State v. Hamilton, 13 Nev. 386.

94 Alabama. State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722; Smith v. State, 8 Ala. App. 187, 62 So. 575.

Massachusetts. Com. v. Knapp, 9 Pick. 496, 20 Am. Dec. 491. Nebraska. Skidmore v. State, 80 Neb. 698, 115 N. W. 288.

New York.
Cow. 137.
Vermont.
558, 29 Atl.

Norton v. People, 8

State v. Valwell, 66 Vt. 1018. England. Rex v. Kelly, Russ. & R. 421; Rex v. Stewart, Russ. & R. 363.

In Norton v. People, 8 Cow. (N. Y.) 137, the defendant had sent his servant to another place to steal certain property, and the servant, acting in pursuance of such directions, but in the absence of the accused, secretly removed the property. Afterwards the accused personally aided the servant in secreting the property. It was held that he could not be convicted under an indictment charging him as a principal in the larceny, since, having been absent at the time the larceny was committed by the servant, he was merely an accessary.

95 Silvas v. State, 71 Tex. Cr. 213, 159 S. W. 223; Davis v. State, 61 Tex. Cr. 611, 136 S. W. 45; Criner v. State, 41 Tex. Cr. 290, 53 S. W. 873.

aider and abettor he must have in some way participated or assisted in the commission of the offense or encouraged its commission.96 Any encouragement or act of assistance is a participation in the crime and is sufficient.97 It may be by words or acts 98 and no particular acts are necessary.99 One may aid and abet without taking physical part in the actual commission of the crime, or doing any overt act towards. its commission, as by standing guard while the act is being per

1

96 Alabama. State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722.

Georgia. Lawrence v. State, 68 Ga. 289; Wright v. State, 14 Ga. App. 185, 80 S. E. 544; Butler v. State, 11 Ga. App. 815, 76 S. E. 368; Bradley v. State, 2 Ga. App. 622, 58 S. E. 1064. Illinois. People v. Cione, 293 Ill. 321, 127 N. E. 646; Burnett v. People, 204 Ill. 208, 68 N. E. 505, 66 L. R. A. 304, 98 Am. St. Rep. 206.

Indiana. Wade v. State, 71 Ind. 535; Clem v. State, 33 Ind. 418.

Iowa. State v. Wolf, 112 Iowa 458, 84 N. W. 536.

Kentucky. Plummer V. Com., 1 Bush 76.

Missouri. State v. Orrick, 106 Mo. 111, 17 S. W. 176, 329.

Nebraska. Brinegar v. State, 82 Neb. 558, 118 N. W. 475; Skidmore v. State, 80 Neb. 698, 115 N. W. 288.

North Carolina. State v. Hildreth, 31 N. C. 440, 51 Am. Dec. 369.

Oklahoma. Drury v. Territory, 9 Okla. 398, 60 Pac. 101.

Texas. Burrell v. State, 18 Tex. 713; Villareal v. State, 78 Tex. Cr. 369, 182 S. W. 322; Taylor v. State, 77 Tex. Cr. 376, 179 S. W. 113; Davis v. State, 55 Tex. Cr. 495, 117 S. W. 159; O'Quinn v. State, 55 Tex. Cr. 18, 115 S. W. 39; Chapman v. State, 43 Tex. Cr. 328, 65 S. W. 1098, 96 Am. St. Rep. 874; Dawson v. State, 38 Tex.. Cr. 50, 41 S. W. 599.

Virginia. Horton v. Com., 99 Va. 848, 38 S. E. 184; Kemp v. Com., 80 Va. 443.

Wisconsin. Connaughty v. State, 1 Wis. 159, 60 Am. Dec. 370.

England. Reg. v. Young, 8 Car. & P. 644; Reg. v. Coney, L. R. 8 Q. B.

Div. 534.

97 Horton v. Com., 99 Va. 848, 38 S. E. 184.

98 McMahan v. State, 168 Ala. 70, 53 So. 89; Morris v. State, 146 Ala. 66, 41 So. 274; White v. People, 139 Ill. 143, 28 N. E. 1083, 32 Am. St. Rep. 196; State v. Dunn, 116 Iowa 219, 89 N. W. 984; Walker v. State, 29 Tex. App. 621, 16 S. W. 548.

The existence of a common design and the aiding and abetting may be shown by actions as well as by words. People v. Barrett, 261 Ill. 232, 103 N. E. 969.

Anyone who is present at the commission of the offense, encouraging or exciting the same by words, looks, gestures or signs, is an aider and abettor. Cooper v. Johnson, 81 Mo. 483; McMannus v. Lee, 43 Mo. 206, 97 Am. Dec. 386.

99 Jones v. State, 174 Ala. 53, 57 So. 31; Raiford v. State, 59 Ala. 106.

A physician who assists a person to obtain drugs or liquors by giving him an illegal prescription aids in the sale, and becomes a party to it. Hyde v. State, 131 Tenn. 208, 174 S. W. 1127; McLain v. State, 43 Tex. Cr. 213, 64 S. W. 865.

1 Alabama. Tanner V. State, 92 Ala. 1, 9 So. 613; Pearce v. State, 4 Ala. App. 32, 58 So. 996.

petrated by others to prevent interference with them or to warn them of the approach of danger.2

The assistance given need not contribute to the criminal result in the sense that but for it the result would not have ensued. It is sufficient if it facilitates or makes it easier for the principal actor to accomplish a result that in all human probability would have transpired without it.3 But if there is no preconcert, uttering words of

California. People v. Moran, 144 Cal. 48, 77 Pac. 777.

Georgia. Wilkerson v. State, 73 Ga. 799.

Illinois. Brennan v. People, 15 Ill.

511.

Mississippi. McCarty v. State, 26 Miss. 299.

Nebraska. Dixon v. State, 46 Neb. 298, 64 N. W. 961.

Nevada. State v. Squaires, 2 Nev.

226.

New Jersey. State v. Hess, 65 N. J. L. 544, 47 Atl. 806.

New York. McCarney v. People, 83 N. Y. 408, 38 Am. Rep. 456.

Texas. Sheppard v. State, 63 Tex. Cr. 569, 140 S. W. 1090; Davis v. State, 61 Tex. Cr. 611, 136 S. W. 45. Virginia. Horton v. Com., 99 Va. 848, 38 S. E. 184.

West Virginia. State v. Cremeans, 62 W. Va. 134, 57 S. E. 405.

It is sufficient if he stands by with a conveyance so that the perpetrator may have a convenient means of escape after the crime is committed. Pirkle v. State, 11 Ga. App. 98, 74 S. E. 709.

One who advises another to commit the crime of housebreaking, or agrees to assist him in doing so, or to remove the property obtained, and who is present when the crime is committed, though outside of the house or on an adjoining lot, and who assists in removing the stolen property, is an aider and abettor and liable as a principal, though he does not assist in breaking into the house, and does

not enter it. Vance v. Com. (Ky.), 115 S. W. 774.

2 Alabama. State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722.

Georgia. Pirkle v. State, 11 Ga. App. 98, 74 S. E. 709.

Indiana. Doan v. State, 26 Ind.

495.

Iowa. State v. Nash, 7 Iowa 347. Missouri. State v. Walker, 98 Mo. 95, 9 S. W. 646, 11 S. W. 1133.

New York. McCarney v. People, 83 N. Y. 408, 38 Am. Rep. 456; People v. Boujet, 2 Park. Cr. 11.

Oregon. State v. Start, 65 Ore. 178, 132 Pac. 512, 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) 266.

Texas. Coffman v. State, 51 Tex. Cr. 478, 103 S. W. 1128; Criner v. State, 41 Tex. Cr. 290, 53 S. W. 873.

Virginia. Mitchell V. Com., 33 Gratt. 845; Dull v. Com., 25 Gratt. 965.

Wisconsin. Vogel v. State, 138 Wis. 315, 119 N. W. 190.

England. Rex v. Passey, 7 Car. & P. 282.

It is sufficient if he prevents others from doing any act, by way of warning the intended victim or otherwise, which would be an obstacle to the consummation of the crime, or render its accomplishment more difficult. State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722.

See also § 230, supra.

3 So one who facilitates a murder by destroying a single chance of life which the assailed might otherwise have had, as by intercepting a warn

incitement or encouragement will not make the utterer guilty, unless they are addressed to, or at least heard by, the perpetrator.

§ 232. Meaning of aid and abet. Aid means to assist,5 or support, and imports a contribution of effort." "To abet is to encourage, counsel, incite, or instigate the commission of a crime."8 Abetting is a positive act in aid of the commission of the offense; a physical or moral force joined with that of the perpetrator in producing it. It may import presence with instigation or encouragement towards the commission of the offense, but without aid or assistance therein." "10 To make one an abettor he must stand in the same relation to the crime as the perpetrator, and must approach it from the same direction and touch it at the same point.11 The word "aid" does not imply guilty knowledge or felonious intent,12 but the word

ing of the intended attack, is guilty as a principal in the second degree, although in all human probability the chance would not have been availed of and death would have resulted anyway. State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722.

4 State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722; Cabbell v. State, 46 Ala. 195. 5 State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722; People v. Bond, 13 Cal. App. 175, 109 Pac. 150; State v. Flynn, 76 N. J. L. 473, 72 Atl. 296.

6 State v. Empey, 79 Iowa 460, 44 N. W. 707.

The word describes the act of an accessary after the fact. State v. Empey, 79 Iowa 460, 44 N. W. 707.

7 State v. Flynn, 76 N. J. L. 473, 72 Atl. 296.

8 State v. Empey, 79 Iowa 460, 44 N. W. 707.

To countenance, assist, give aid. State v. Start, 65 Ore. 178, 132 Pac. 512, 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) 266.

To incite or encourage a person to commit a crime. Rapalje & Lawrence Dict.; State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722. Quoted in People v. Bond, 13 Cal. App. 175, 109 Pac. 150. An abettor is one who gives aid or

comfort, or who either commands, advises, instigates, or encourages another to commit a crime-a person who by being present, by words or conduct assists or incites another to commit the criminal act. Black's Dict., P. 6; State v. Davenport, 156 N. C. 596, 72 S. E. 7.

An abettor is one who, being present or in the neighborhood, incites another to commit a crime. Rapalje

& Lawrence Dict.; State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722; People v. Bond, 13 Cal. App. 175, 109 Pac. 150.

The word indicates the act of an accessary before the fact. State v. Empey, 79 Iowa 460, 44 N. W. 707. 9 State v. Teahan, 50 Conn. 92. The words "aiding, abetting, or assisting" in a statute are affirmative in character. White v. People, 81 Ill. 333.

10 State v. Flynn, 76 N. J. L. 473, 72 Atl. 296.

11 So one who purchases liquor is not an abettor of the offense of selling it. State v. Teahan, 50 Conn. 92.

12 People v. Compton, 123 Cal. 403, 56 Pac. 44; People v. Bond, 13 Cal. App. 175, 109 Pac. 150; People v. Lewis, 9 Cal. App. 279, 98 Pac. 1078.

"abet" includes knowledge of the wrongful purpose of the perpetrator and encouragement in the crime.18 It has been said that the words aid and abet have come to be practically synonymous, 14 and "that to abet has come to mean to aid by presence, actual or constructive, and incitement, and that to aid means not only actual assistance, the supplementing of another's efforts, but also presence for the purpose of such actual assistance as the circumstances may demand or admit of, and the incitement or encouragement which the fact of such presence for such purpose naturally imports and implies." 15 "To aid and abet is to assent to an act, to lend to it countenance and approval, either by an active participation in it, or by, in some manner, advising or encouraging it," 16 and a person who is present and knowingly contributes to the commission of an offense, or acts with or encourages the actual perpetrator in its commission, is an aider and abettor.17 The two words together com

"A person may aid in the commission of an offense by doing innocently some act essential to its accomplishment, and this is especially true in regard to the crime of forgery, for he may pass the forged instrument without knowing that it is forged." People v. Dole, 122 Cal. 486, 55 Pac. 581, 68 Am. St. Rep. 50.

13 People v. Dole, 122 Cal. 486, 55 Pac. 581, 68 Am. St. Rep. 50; People v. Bond, 13 Cal. App. 175, 109 Pac. 150; People v. Lewis, 9 Cal. App. 279, 98 Pac. 1078; Loeb v. State, 6 Ga. App. 23, 64 S. E. 338; State v. Start, 65 Ore. 178, 132 Pac. 512, 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) 266.

14 State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722; Raiford v. State, 59 Ala. 106; Loeb v. State, 6 Ga. App. 23, 64 S. E. 338.

In State v. Empey, 79 Iowa 460, 44 N. W. 707, it was held that the words are not synonymous, but that the word abet indicates the act of an accessary before the fact and the word aid the act of an accessary after the fact. 15 State v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722.

16 State v. Maloy, 44 Iowa 104.

A person aids and abets when he is present and does some act to render aid to the actual perpetrator of the crime, though without taking a direct share in its commission. Black's Dict., P. 56; State v. Davenport, 156 N. C. 596, 72 S. E. 7.

17 People v. Bond, 13 Cal. App. 175, 109 Pac. 150; Walker v. State, 29 Tex. App. 621, 16 S. W. 548.

An aider and abettor is one who advises, counsels, procures or encourages another to commit a crime, though not personally present at the time and place of its commission. Pearce v. Territory, 11 Okla. 438, 68 Pac. 504.

It is sufficient if encouragement is given to commit the felony. Jones v. State, 174 Ala. 53, 57 So. 31.

One who procures, directs, or causes another not to do an act which the law requires him to do may be convicted as an aider and abettor. United States v. Van Schaick, 134 Fed. 592.

If the accused is present, and with knowledge of the intention of the perpetrator, aids him by acts or encourages him by words or gestures, he

« AnteriorContinuar »