There may be larceny by fraud, rather than embezzlement even where the owner of the personal property delivers it to the defendant, if the latter has, at that time, "a fraudulent intention to make use of the possession as a means of converting such property to his own use, and does so convert it."

If the fraudulent intent occurs later, and the defendant converts the property, he is guilty of embezzlement.

Whether a particular act is larceny by fraud or embezzlement thus turns not on the intrinsic quality of the act, but on when the felonious intent arose--a question for the jury under appropriate instructions.

" `Larceny has been held to be a continuing offense, and statutes providing that the thief may be prosecuted in any county into which he takes the stolen goods have been held to be constitutional, where the provisions of the Constitution are that the prosecution must be in the county where the crime is committed.

—this court very clearly distinguishes between the crime of larceny and embezzlement, and holds that where larceny is committed by fraud, or whether it is embezzled is determined with reference to the time when the fraudulent intent to convert the property to the taker's own use.

[BOOK] Bioethics and the Law: Notes, Cases and Problems

[CITATION] Economic crimes

[CITATION] Constitutional law: Principles and practice

[BOOK] Privacy and the Constitution

[BOOK] The concepts and methods of constitutional law

[CITATION] Cases and materials on criminal law and procedure