## Facts

- Joseph Caruso was convicted of grand larceny and his punishment was fixed at three years in the penitentiary.
- Around 2:00 a.m. on August 24, 1958, a Greeneville police officer (Lyle Doty) was told that a robbery or similar crime was in progress at the business building of Greene County Producers.
- The officer reached the building within about five minutes, heard three men running, and heard what he described as water “pouring” from a nearby creek area.
- When the officer entered the building, he saw the back door open.
- He saw a safe just outside the office area, with a “dolly” or cart positioned against it; the safe had fallen over and struck a counter.
- The safe weighed about 600 pounds and had been left at its usual place inside the office at closing time.
- Using the cart, the intruder moved the safe about five feet out of the office and into the main part of the building.
- The safe contained about $34,000 in money and securities.
- Caruso appealed without filing assignments of error; the Supreme Court reviewed the record for reversible error as required by statute, and also considered the new-trial claim that the evidence preponderated against the verdict.

## Issues

1. Whether moving the safe about five feet within the same building constituted the “taking and carrying away” (asportation) required for larceny under Tennessee law.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction (including review of whether the proof preponderated against the verdict under the motion for new trial).
3. Whether the record showed any reversible error requiring relief despite the absence of assignments of error.

## Decision

- The conviction was affirmed.
- The court held that moving the safe five feet under the circumstances shown constituted asportation and satisfied the “taking and carrying away” element of larceny.
- After reviewing the record as required, the court found no reversible error and found the proof adequate to support the jury’s verdict.

## Legal Principles

- Tennessee’s larceny statute defines the offense as the felonious taking and carrying away of the personal goods of another, requiring a trespassory taking of possession plus a carrying away.
- “Carrying away” (asportation) can be met by moving the property, even a short distance, once the defendant has exercised control over it with felonious intent.
- When an appellant files no assignments of error, the Tennessee Supreme Court may still review the record for reversible error when a statute requires that review.

## Conclusion

The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed Caruso’s grand larceny conviction, ruling that the intruder’s use of a dolly to move a 600‑pound safe about five feet from an office into the main part of the building was a sufficient carrying away to complete larceny, and that the record revealed no reversible error.


Caruso v. State, 326 S.W.2d 434 (1958)