Dale v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Dale v. State

22 S.W. 40, 32 Tex. Crim. 78

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 22, 1893

DocketNo. 127.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 22 S.W. 40 (Dale 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

Dale v. State, 22 S.W. 40, 32 Tex. Crim. 78 (Tex. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

SIMKLNS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the theft of a yearling, and sentenced to two years confinement in the penitentiary, from which he appeals. There are no bills of exception in the record. The only questions raised in the case are, first, the sufficiency of the evidence; second, the charge of the court, to the effect that one falsely claiming to own a certain yearling on the range, which he points out and sells to an *80 other, who in good faith appropriates it, is as guilty of theft as if he had first taken possession of it and sold it. As to the first ground, the eviclearly supports the verdict. As to the charge complained of, it is the law. Doss’ case, 21 Texas Cr. App., 505; Williams v. The State, 24 Texas Cr. App., 17; Minter v. The State, 26 Texas Cr. App., 217; Harris v. The State, 29 Texas Cr. App., 101. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Judges all present and concurring.

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

SIMKLNS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the theft of a yearling, and sentenced to two years confinement in the penitentiary, from which he appeals. There are no bills of exception in the record. The only questions raised in the case are, first, the sufficiency of the evidence; second, the charge of the court, to the effect that one falsely claiming to own a certain yearling on the range, which he points out and sells to an *80 other, who in good faith appropriates it, is as guilty of theft as if he had first taken possession of it and sold it. As to the first ground, the eviclearly supports the verdict. As to the charge complained of, it is the law. Doss’ case, 21 Texas Cr. App., 505; Williams v. The State, 24 Texas Cr. App., 17; Minter v. The State, 26 Texas Cr. App., 217; Harris v. The State, 29 Texas Cr. App., 101. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Judges all present and concurring.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 S.W. 40, 32 Tex. Crim. 78, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dale-v-state-texcrimapp-1893.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack