Coleman v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Coleman v. State

25 S.W.2d 622, 114 Tex. Crim. 362, 1930 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 157

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedFebruary 26, 1930

DocketNo. 13056.

StatusPublished

This text of 25 S.W.2d 622 (Coleman 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

Coleman v. State, 25 S.W.2d 622, 114 Tex. Crim. 362, 1930 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 157 (Tex. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

MARTIN, Judge.

Offense, wilfully killing a horse with intent to injure the owner; penalty, a fine of $50.00.

Appellant appeared at the home of the prosecuting witness riding a horse with a thirty-thirty Winchester rifle on his saddle. This horse had a gap broken off its left fore foot which caused it to make a distinctive track. Prosecuting witness left appellant at his home and on his return two of his horses had been shot, one of which died. Appellant had a dog following him. Witness and the Sheriff of the County took up the track of the horse ridden by appellant and followed a chain of tracks which appeared to be accompanied by a dog to where the horses were wounded and from thence to appellant’s home. A-witness nearby heard some shots and heard

*363 a voice which he recognized as that of appellant calling a dog. The voice came from the direction of the shots and only a short distance away. Ill feeling was shown to exist between appellant and the owner of the horses.

The only question presented is the alleged insufficiency of the evidence. This we deem sufficient.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

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

MARTIN, Judge.

Offense, wilfully killing a horse with intent to injure the owner; penalty, a fine of $50.00.

Appellant appeared at the home of the prosecuting witness riding a horse with a thirty-thirty Winchester rifle on his saddle. This horse had a gap broken off its left fore foot which caused it to make a distinctive track. Prosecuting witness left appellant at his home and on his return two of his horses had been shot, one of which died. Appellant had a dog following him. Witness and the Sheriff of the County took up the track of the horse ridden by appellant and followed a chain of tracks which appeared to be accompanied by a dog to where the horses were wounded and from thence to appellant’s home. A-witness nearby heard some shots and heard

*363 a voice which he recognized as that of appellant calling a dog. The voice came from the direction of the shots and only a short distance away. Ill feeling was shown to exist between appellant and the owner of the horses.

The only question presented is the alleged insufficiency of the evidence. This we deem sufficient.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 S.W.2d 622, 114 Tex. Crim. 362, 1930 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-state-texcrimapp-1930.