State v. Mansfield

33 Tex. 129
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1870
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 33 Tex. 129 (State v. Mansfield) 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
State v. Mansfield, 33 Tex. 129 (Tex. 1870).

Opinion

Lindsay, J.

In indictments for the theft of cattle, sheep, goats, or hogs, it is needless to do more in describing the animal alleged to be stolen than to designate the owner’s pame, or the [130]*130person holding the possession of the property for the owner.- ¡Such charge is sufficiently descriptive to put an accused upon trial. This indictment, in charging the accused with fraudulently taking a certain hog, of a designated value, of the property of a named person, from his possession, without his consent, and with the intent to deprive him of the value of.it, and to appropriate the hog to the use of the taker, is sufficiently certain and definite to enable the accused to plead any judgment rendered thereon in bar of any future prosecution' for the same offense. The judgment of the court, therefore, quashing the indictment, was erroneous, and is reversed.'

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

State v. Murphy
39 Tex. 46 (Texas Supreme Court, 1873)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
33 Tex. 129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mansfield-tex-1870.