Daniel v. State
This text of 547 S.W.2d 597 (Daniel 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.
Opinions
OPINION
Appellant was convicted of theft. Punishment was assessed at four years.
We are met at the outset with fundamental error that requires consideration in the interest of justice. Art. 40.09(13), V.A.C. C.P.
The indictment alleges in relevant part that appellant:
“. . . did exercise control over property, namely silverware, of the value of under two hundred dollars, with the intent to deprive the owner, Joske’s of Houston, of the property.”
The failure of the indictment in this case to allege that appellant exercised control over the property without the owner’s consent, an essential element of the offense of theft, renders the State’s pleading fundamentally defective. The conviction is therefore void. V.T.C.A., Penal Code Sec. 31.03; Reynolds v. State, 547 S.W.2d 590 (Tex.Cr.App., decided this day on rehearing).
The judgment is reversed and the indictment is ordered dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
547 S.W.2d 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-v-state-texcrimapp-1977.