## Facts

- Gazell was indicted in the St. Louis Criminal Court for horse stealing (larceny).
- The horses were kept within a fenced enclosure; the fence was high and remained intact.
- Evidence showed Gazell entered the enclosure, attached a bridle or line to a horse, and began leading it away from where it had been standing.
- Gazell was interrupted before the horse could be removed from the enclosure.
- The trial court instructed the jury that if Gazell took or led the horse away any distance with felonious intent, asportation was complete even if the horse never left the enclosure.
- The jury convicted Gazell, and he was sentenced to the penitentiary.
- Gazell appealed, arguing the instruction wrongly allowed conviction without proof the horse was removed from the enclosure and effectively treated an attempt as a completed larceny.

## Issues

1. Whether larceny’s asportation element is satisfied when a defendant, acting with felonious intent, leads a horse some distance within the owner’s enclosure without removing it from the enclosure.
2. Whether the challenged jury instruction improperly stated the law of asportation for larceny.

## Decision

- The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the conviction.
- The court held that leading the horse any distance with felonious intent constituted sufficient asportation to complete larceny, even though the horse remained within the enclosure.
- The court found no error in the challenged instruction, which correctly stated that removal beyond the lot was unnecessary if the jury found a felonious taking and movement.

## Legal Principles

- For larceny, “the least removal” of the property from its prior place, coupled with felonious intent, is sufficient asportation even if the property is not fully carried off.
- Asportation focuses on displacement from the original position under the defendant’s control, not on crossing property boundaries or exiting an enclosure.
- Conduct exceeds mere preparation and completes larceny when the defendant obtains control of the chattel and moves it from where it stood with intent to steal.

## Conclusion

A larceny is complete when a defendant, with felonious intent, takes control of a horse and leads it any distance from its prior position; removal from the owner’s enclosure is not required, and an instruction stating that rule is proper.


State v. Gazell, 30 Mo. 92 (Mo. 1860)