Walton v. State
This text of 14 Tex. 381 (Walton 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.
Opinion
The question is as to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. And that it was amply sufficient is beyond a doubt. The statute (Hart. Dig. Art. 1478) dispenses with the necessity of proving what was bet, or in what, in particular, the betting consisted. It is sufficient to support a conviction, if the evidence was such as reasonably to satisfy the jury, that the defendant did “ bet ” or “ was concerned in betting ” as charged. Proof of the betting of “ checks,” as representing money, was sufficient proof of the betting of money. Proof sufficient to satisfy the jury that the defendant bet money [382]*382or property, or anything which served as the representative of either, was sufficient proof of the betting charged in the indictment. The proof fully warranted the jury in finding that the defendant did bet money. The judgment is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
14 Tex. 381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walton-v-state-tex-1855.