Trotter v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Trotter v. State

265 S.W. 386, 98 Tex. Crim. 287, 1924 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 600

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 11, 1924

DocketNo. 8637.

StatusPublished

This text of 265 S.W. 386 (Trotter v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Trotter v. State, 265 S.W. 386, 98 Tex. Crim. 287, 1924 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 600 (Tex. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

HAWKINS, Judge.

— Conviction is for theft with punishment assessed at two years in the penitentiary.

The property alleged, to have been stolen was forty-one joints of oil well tubing, alleged to have been the property of one J. F. Smith. Smith was superintendent of an oil company and the proof is positive that about the time alleged in the indictment as much as forty-one joints of two-inch oil well tubing was stolen which was property belonging to said company and under the control of said Smith. One McBride was used as a witness by the State. He testified that he and appellant acted together in the theft of the property in question and sold it to one Plank, taking in payment for the pipe so stolen two checks, one payable to each of the parties. Other evidence is amply sufficient to corroborate McBride relative to the matters testified to by him, and to support the verdict of the jury. There are no bills of exception in the record and the sufficiency of the evidence is the only question before us.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

HAWKINS, Judge.

— Conviction is for theft with punishment assessed at two years in the penitentiary.

The property alleged, to have been stolen was forty-one joints of oil well tubing, alleged to have been the property of one J. F. Smith. Smith was superintendent of an oil company and the proof is positive that about the time alleged in the indictment as much as forty-one joints of two-inch oil well tubing was stolen which was property belonging to said company and under the control of said Smith. One McBride was used as a witness by the State. He testified that he and appellant acted together in the theft of the property in question and sold it to one Plank, taking in payment for the pipe so stolen two checks, one payable to each of the parties. Other evidence is amply sufficient to corroborate McBride relative to the matters testified to by him, and to support the verdict of the jury. There are no bills of exception in the record and the sufficiency of the evidence is the only question before us.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 S.W. 386, 98 Tex. Crim. 287, 1924 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 600, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trotter-v-state-texcrimapp-1924.