McLaren v. State

2 S.W. 858, 21 Tex. Ct. App. 513, 1886 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 184
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided June 15, 1886·No. No. 3920·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Willson, Judge.

This conviction is not only not supported by, but is against the evidence and the law. Defendant explained his possession of the property by saying that he had found it on the road and had taken it up and carried it to his [517]*517home. He proved the truth of this explanation by a witness who testified that he was in company with the defendant when the property was so found and taken. There is not a particle of evidence tending to show the falsity of defendant’s explanation, but, on the contrary, all the evidence in the case tends strongly to establish its truth, and corroborates the testimony of the witness who stated positi vely that the defendant did find the property and took it innocently. Defendant at no time claimed the property as his own, or attempted to conceal it, but, on the contrary, made efforts to discover the owner of it, and did, in fact, discover the owner of a portion of it, an over coat, and restored the same to the owner.

Opinion delivered June 15, 1886.

The court erred in not granting the defendant a new trial, and for this error the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

McLaren v. State, 2 S.W. 858, 21 Tex. Ct. App. 513, 1886 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 184 (Tex. Ct. App. 1886).

2 S.W. 858 (McLaren v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Watson v. State
204 S.W.3d 404 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Watson, Delair
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006
Clewis v. State
922 S.W.2d 126 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1996)
Libby v. Ralston
43 P. 294 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1896)