Parchman v. State

44 Tex. 192
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1875
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 44 Tex. 192 (Parchman v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Parchman v. State, 44 Tex. 192 (Tex. 1875).

Opinion

Gould, Associate Justice.

The indictment charges theft of an “ ox,” without using the statutory word “ cattle.”

Following previous decisions of this court, we hold that under the Code of Criminal Procedure this is a sufficient indictment for theft of “cattle.” (The State v. Otto Lange, 22 Tex., 591; The State v. Eisenheimer, Austin Term, 1875.)

It may he added that sufficiency of such an indictment, outside of the code, is maintained by some very respectable authorities. (Bishop on Stat. Crimes, sec. 440, ref. to The State v. Pearce, Peck, 66; The State v. Hambleton, 22 Mo., 452; The State v. Abbot, 20 Vt., 537; Taylor v. The State, 6 Humph., 285; see also Wharton’s Am. Cr. Law, 4th ed., sec. 377, and references.)

The evidence supports the verdict, and there being no error the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Moore v. State
2 Tex. Ct. App. 350 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1877)
Henry v. State
45 Tex. 84 (Texas Supreme Court, 1876)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 Tex. 192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parchman-v-state-tex-1875.