Mathews v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Smith. Tried below before the Hon. Z. Norton. There is no occasion for a statement of the facts.
1Opinion of the CourtOgden, J.
The defendant was convicted of burglary, and has brought the case up here for revision, upon the ground, that in an indictment for burglary at night, it is not sufficient to charge that the entrance was by breaking, instead of charging that the entrance was by force, fraud, or threats.
It has been frequently decided by this court that in charging an offense it is not necessary to use the precise language of the statute, provided apt language is used conveying the same meaning. The word breaking necessarily includes force, and if the defendant entered by breaking he must have entered by force,…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Harris v. Thornton's Department StoreCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936
- Robinson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Wilson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1930
- Ex Parte Cowden, Jr.Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1914
- Young v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1915
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.