Show Vernal Sheep Case Upheld by Supreme Court UNANIMOUS IOUS DECISION OF SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS S DISTRICT COURT IN JOHNE JOUNE JOUN E CASE CASC The Tho unanimous decision of the thO the Judges judges of tho Utah State Supreme court holding that John 1 C E Me- Me Mc Naughtan Mc-Naughtan was waa guilty of ot altering marks and brands on sheep with intent to steal teal brings to memory the long out drawn trial in 1933 before Judge Abe W Turner Al- Al Also Al AI Also so the lengthy petition signed by many In the defendants behalf The case was appealed to the supreme court and last yeas year the findings and verdict of court and jury were sustained A rehearing before that body was granted the outcome of which is their new and final decision Justice Wolfe wrote the decision lon concurred in by all five lve of the su- su supreme su supreme preme court justices The rehearing was granted the defendant on the ground that the evidence was in- in In Insufficient sufficient to sustain the verdict especially In that tha there was in- in insufficient insufficient in sufficient evidence that the defendant defend defend- defendant defendant ant altered alrered or marked the parti parti- particular parti- parti particular particular cular sheep with intent to steal We quote quota in part the findings of the supreme court There re o Is IK evidence evidence from which the Jury could infer that these six sheep belonged to the tha the different different Five of the tho six sheep were vere in the court room before the jury the sixth had been killed by a dog but there wOoS was i evidence as to the earmarks and brands found on that The defendant on the morning of September 10 1933 1033 drove to the carrol He was waa pre pre- present present pre present sent when the separated the these six sheep from their herd herdIn herdin herdIn In the corral for tor stray sheep and he then claimed them and loaded them In his trailer The earmarked their sheep In different ways but In the case of all these six sheep the earmarks as they appeared on September were one or another of the s a earmarks with an part pMt of the ear cut away avny then described the various markings There is ample evidence to sup sup- support support sup support port the f fact t that these sheep were the ay sh sheep p But ut sev Bev oral sev era eral witnesses testified that he stated in n their presence that he branded these six sheep There Is therefore ample evidence that the tho defendant altered the marks maries and brands on these six sheep and that they the were sheep But the defendant strenuously con con- contends contends con contends tends that re Is no evidence that he marked these sheep with the In- In Intent intent In Intent tent to steal them We think that after atter the jury definitely came cams the to-the to the conclusion that they were Sid Sid Sid- s 5 sheep and that their Continued on page four I VERNAL VERvAL SHEEP CASE CASEI UPHELD BY SUPREME COURT COUR COURTr r I Continued from from Pi page oriel one one brands and marks were altered and that the defendant had done don the marking with his brand the th jury could conclude from the ad- ad additional ad additional fact that he claimed them themen thenon en cn the morning of September 10 that he purposely changed them then then-so so he ht could claim them That a person alt alters rs a brand with Intent to steal almost al a always s must be inferred from circum circum- circumstances circumstances stances It is most likely Ukel that the person who made the cuts In the earmarks marks of ti ree differently marked sheep in regards t to which there is ample evidence that they belonged to others He might perhaps per per- perhaps per perhaps haps make a mistake as to one mark but here were elf sheep with three different types of earmarks an belonging to others than the defendant The evidence is that he stated he marked them Later he claimed them It appears to us there IllS lis Is an ample Interlocking of the cir cir- cir from which the Jury y could reasonably conclude that 1 hl he altered the brands with ith Intent to toI I steal I We have hate considered all the cas cases cited by defendant and we find none where here it was held insufficient to sho show Intent int nt to steal where there t as evidence tending to show that the defendant did mark as his what hat the jury could readily infer he must have ha hate known was as not his The ruling of District restrict Judge Abe W Turner were ere upheld throughout through through- throughout throughout out Lengthy in regard to the place of the commission of the crime crim and also the time of the crime crim Also the range of charges v were ere upheld And a marking or branding in such a case as this thir is Ls so inextricably abl ably connected with altering or de- de defacing de facing facin a mark or brand that we e could Justifiably expose ourselves to lathe the criticism of being oter tech olter tech tech- if we e held that the words I marking and ind branding and altering alter alter- altering ing and defacing marks or brands were not in this and perhaps most Iere cases interchangeable I IThe The question of being Indebted to the bank of T deh one of the plaintiffs was was carefully reviewed and the rul- rul ruling ruling ing of the court upheld Regarding the handshaking in- in incident incident While we c think It Is best for forI anyone Interested in the outcome I Hof of a case to have no contacts with jurymen which might even give gle gl e the appearance of attempting to t cul- cul culI cultivate them the handshaking in- in incident incident I by William H was as brought to the attention of the court He apparently considered it This Tl s incident standing alone was Voas not prejudicial nor can we say the court abused its discretion in refusing to grant granta a new trial on that account |