Rountree v. State

164 S.W.2d 847, 144 Tex. Crim. 576, 1942 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 431
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided June 10, 1942·No. No. 22101.·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is from a conviction for receiving and concealing stolen property with a sentence of two years in the penitentiary.

The facts of this case were fully stated in a former appeal, opinion reported in 140 Tex. Cr. R. 188; 148 S. W. (2d) 942, and will not be again given. It was there held that Rountree was an accomplice and wrongfully prosecuted as a principal. This holding is adhered to.

The indictment contains three counts, one of which is that for which he was convicted. Inasmuch as he was an accomplice, he could, under the facts of this case, be prosecuted either as *577 such or for receiving and concealing stolen property. If he had been a principal, the rule would be different. This question is considered and it is so held in Gammel v. State, 62 S. W. (2d) 139, and Petty v. State, 82 S. W. (2d) 965, to which we here refer for further discussion of the law.

Other questions raised are without merit.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

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

Rountree v. State, 164 S.W.2d 847, 144 Tex. Crim. 576, 1942 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 431 (Tex. 1942).

164 S.W.2d 847 (Rountree v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cagle v. State
505 S.W.2d 858 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1974)
Parker v. State
378 S.W.2d 848 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1964)
State v. Sheeley
162 P.2d 96 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1945)