Rodriguez v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
MORROW, Presiding Judge.
The offense is burglary; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for three years.
The indictment is defective in failing to contain an averment to the effect that the intent of the accused was to deprive the owner of the value of the alleged stolen property.
From the case of Martini v. State, 32 S. W. (2d) 654, the following quotation is taken: “One of the requisites of an indictment for theft is an allegation that the accused took the property ‘with intent to deprive the owner of the value thereof.’ Moore v. State, 74 Texas Crim. Rep., 66, 166 S. W., 1153;…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Martini v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1930
- Moore v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1914
3Cited by7 opinions
- Gonzales v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1975
- Ex Parte MillardCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1979
- Rodriguez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1936
- Ex Parte ValdezCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1977
- Ex Parte CannonCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1976
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.