Clark v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Clark v. State

89 S.W. 647, 48 Tex. Crim. 527, 1905 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 249

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedOctober 18, 1905

DocketNo. 3118.

StatusPublished

This text of 89 S.W. 647 (Clark 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

Clark v. State, 89 S.W. 647, 48 Tex. Crim. 527, 1905 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 249 (Tex. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

HENDERSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of embezzlement, and his punishment assessed at four years confinement in the penitentiary; hence this appeal.

Appellant contends that he could not have been convicted of more than a misdemeanor embezzlement, inasmuch as there were no sales on any one day of as much as $50 of goods. We do not regard the *528 daily sales as material, inasmuch as he was not to account each day for the sales made, but was to make a final accounting of all the goods sold to his employer when he returned to Longview, his employment being to take a wagon load of goods, $137 in value, from Longview to Kilgore, and there sell them out, and when he had done so to account to his employer for the proceeds. Instead of doing this he sold the goods out, left the wagon and mules in the streets of Kilgore, and absconded, and was subsequently caught in Louisiana. According to his own confession he had as much as $85 in money. And he embezzled at least this amount. There is no evidence of any conversion until he had disposed of all the goods. The court instructed the jury with reference to a misdemeanor, and the jury determined this matter against appellant, and the evidence sustains their finding. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

HENDERSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of embezzlement, and his punishment assessed at four years confinement in the penitentiary; hence this appeal.

Appellant contends that he could not have been convicted of more than a misdemeanor embezzlement, inasmuch as there were no sales on any one day of as much as $50 of goods. We do not regard the *528 daily sales as material, inasmuch as he was not to account each day for the sales made, but was to make a final accounting of all the goods sold to his employer when he returned to Longview, his employment being to take a wagon load of goods, $137 in value, from Longview to Kilgore, and there sell them out, and when he had done so to account to his employer for the proceeds. Instead of doing this he sold the goods out, left the wagon and mules in the streets of Kilgore, and absconded, and was subsequently caught in Louisiana. According to his own confession he had as much as $85 in money. And he embezzled at least this amount. There is no evidence of any conversion until he had disposed of all the goods. The court instructed the jury with reference to a misdemeanor, and the jury determined this matter against appellant, and the evidence sustains their finding. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 S.W. 647, 48 Tex. Crim. 527, 1905 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clark-v-state-texcrimapp-1905.