Christi v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Christi v. State

277 S.W.2d 911, 161 Tex. Crim. 453, 1955 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1449

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 23, 1955

DocketNo. 27,495

StatusPublished

This text of 277 S.W.2d 911 (Christi v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Christi v. State, 277 S.W.2d 911, 161 Tex. Crim. 453, 1955 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1449 (Tex. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

WOODLEY, Judge.

The conviction is for passing a forged instrument; the punshment, 2 years in the penitentiary.

There are no bills of exception and no brief has been filed on appellant’s behalf.

The evidence, viewed from the standpoint of the state, shows that appellant identified himself by a “driver’s license” as Jimmy G. Cross, and cashed the check offered in evidence at a Weingarten Store in Houston, which purported to be a check drawn by Rudy Dvorak, Painting Contractor, payable to Jimmy G. Cross as “wages for painting house.” The evidence shows further that the check was a forgery, and that Jimmy G. Cross had never worked for Dvorak. Process for Cross was not served, the information furnished the officer being that he was a young man and was in military service stationed in California.

Appellant denied that he cashed the check and testified that he had never been in the store; had never seen the check; did not know Jimmy G. Cross, and had never used his “driver’s license.”

The jury chose to accept the state’s testimony and the evidence sustains their verdict.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WOODLEY, Judge.

The conviction is for passing a forged instrument; the punshment, 2 years in the penitentiary.

There are no bills of exception and no brief has been filed on appellant’s behalf.

The evidence, viewed from the standpoint of the state, shows that appellant identified himself by a “driver’s license” as Jimmy G. Cross, and cashed the check offered in evidence at a Weingarten Store in Houston, which purported to be a check drawn by Rudy Dvorak, Painting Contractor, payable to Jimmy G. Cross as “wages for painting house.” The evidence shows further that the check was a forgery, and that Jimmy G. Cross had never worked for Dvorak. Process for Cross was not served, the information furnished the officer being that he was a young man and was in military service stationed in California.

Appellant denied that he cashed the check and testified that he had never been in the store; had never seen the check; did not know Jimmy G. Cross, and had never used his “driver’s license.”

The jury chose to accept the state’s testimony and the evidence sustains their verdict.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

277 S.W.2d 911, 161 Tex. Crim. 453, 1955 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christi-v-state-texcrimapp-1955.