Pitts v. State

ON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR REHEARING.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The chief contention in appellant’s motion for rehearing is that this court erred in holding that Claude Ellis was the owner *541of the house involved. It is stated in the motion that there is no evidence that Claude Ellis was the owner of the house, but that “* * * the evidence only shows that he lived there.”

It was said in Banks v. State, 143 Tex. Crim. Rep. 61, 157 S. W. 2d 360 (at page 361) :

“The allegation of ownership is merely to indicate and identify the subject of the crime, and the title to the property is not in issue. Hence, it is…