Thompson v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Thompson v. State

17 S.W. 718, 21 Tex. Ct. App. 141, 1886 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 103

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 17, 1886

DocketNo. 3750

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 17 S.W. 718 (Thompson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Thompson v. State, 17 S.W. 718, 21 Tex. Ct. App. 141, 1886 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 103 (Tex. Ct. App. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

Hurt, Judge.

This is a conviction for theft of sheep, the property of Margaret MtiSTeeley.

Upon the trial, over the objections of defendant, the State read in evidence part of the transcript before the committing court, showing that Mrs. MtiSTeeley made the complaint, and that defendant waived an examination and gave bond, etc. That part of the transcript, under the facts in this case, which showed who made the complaint, was competent. But that part which informed the jury that defendant waived an examination and gave bond was very clearly inadmissible, and should not have been permitted to go to the jury.

We are of the opinion that the evidence in this case is not sufficient to sustain the conviction. (The Reporter will give the evidence in full.) ■

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

Hurt, Judge.

This is a conviction for theft of sheep, the property of Margaret MtiSTeeley.

Upon the trial, over the objections of defendant, the State read in evidence part of the transcript before the committing court, showing that Mrs. MtiSTeeley made the complaint, and that defendant waived an examination and gave bond, etc. That part of the transcript, under the facts in this case, which showed who made the complaint, was competent. But that part which informed the jury that defendant waived an examination and gave bond was very clearly inadmissible, and should not have been permitted to go to the jury.

We are of the opinion that the evidence in this case is not sufficient to sustain the conviction. (The Reporter will give the evidence in full.) ■

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 S.W. 718, 21 Tex. Ct. App. 141, 1886 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-v-state-texapp-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack