This section is from the book "Popular Law Library Vol10 Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Wills, Administration", by Albert H. Putney. Also available from Amazon: Popular Law-Dictionary.
One found in the possession of recently stolen goods taken in the commission of a burglary will be presumed to have committed the burglary in the absence of any reasonable explanation as to how he came into possession of the property.215 And evidence that goods so taken were found in possession of the wife of the accused,216 or in possession of a person with whom he associated before and after the burglary, is competent.217
213 Robinson vs. State, 53 Md., 151; State vs. Worthem (Iowa), 82 N. W., 910; Hughes Cr. Law, Sec. 710.
214 Love vs. People, 160 Ill., 508; Lyons, 68 Ill., 280; People vs. McCord, 76 Mich., 200; Hughes Cr. Law, Sec. 711.
216 Flannigan vs. People, 214 Ill., 170, 179; Magee vs. People, 139 Ill., 140; Langford vs. People, 134 Ill., 444. But see Porterfield vs. Dom., 91 Va., 801; State vs. Shaffer, 59 Iowa, 290; People vs. Frazier, 2 Wheeler Cr. (N. Y.), 55.
216 Medicus vs. State (Tex. Cr.), 22 S. W., 878. 217 Frazier vs. State, 135 Ind., 38;
Branson vs. Com., 92 Ky., 330;
Riding vs. State, 40 Tex. Cr., 452. See also State vs. Tilton, 63 Iowa, 117; Shropshire vs.
State, 69 Ga., 273; Sparks vs.
State, Ill Ga., 836; State vs.
Warford, 106 Mo., 55; Jackson vs. State, 28 Tex. App., 370;
King vs. State, 99 Ga., 686;
People vs. Gordon, 40 Mich., 716; State vs. Powell, 61
Kan., 81.
Any tools or implements adapted to the purpose of burglary found in possession of one charged with burglary soon after the commission of the crime, may be introduced in evidence against him.218
 
Continue to: