Craig v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Craig v. State

72 S.W.2d 272, 126 Tex. Crim. 456, 1934 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 724

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedMay 23, 1934

DocketNo. 16687.

StatusPublished

This text of 72 S.W.2d 272 (Craig 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

Craig v. State, 72 S.W.2d 272, 126 Tex. Crim. 456, 1934 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 724 (Tex. 1934).

Pincite

Opinions

CHRISTIAN, Judge. —

The offense is theft of cattle; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

Frank Brown v. The State, ^Opinion No. 16,688, this day delivered, is a companion case. The facts here are the same as those proven upon the trial of Frank Brown. In Brown’s Case we held that the trial court committed error in failing to charge on circumstantial evidence. In the present case appellant timely and properly excepted to the charge of the court for its failure to submit an instruction on the subject of circumstantial evidence. The failure of the court' to respond to the exception must work a reversal of the judgment.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

CHRISTIAN, Judge. —

The offense is theft of cattle; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

Frank Brown v. The State, ^Opinion No. 16,688, this day delivered, is a companion case. The facts here are the same as those proven upon the trial of Frank Brown. In Brown’s Case we held that the trial court committed error in failing to charge on circumstantial evidence. In the present case appellant timely and properly excepted to the charge of the court for its failure to submit an instruction on the subject of circumstantial evidence. The failure of the court' to respond to the exception must work a reversal of the judgment.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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)

72 S.W.2d 272, 126 Tex. Crim. 456, 1934 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 724, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/craig-v-state-texcrimapp-1934.