State v. Slack
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Harrison. 1 The case was tried before Hon. M. D. Ector, one of the district judges. The appellee, a freedman, was indicted for stealing a mule, and the jury found him guilty, and assessed his punishment at twelve months’ imprisonment in the penitentiary. The court sustained a general motion in arrest of judgment, and the State appealed. The indictment alleged no date on which the offense was committed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Harrison. 1 The case was tried before Hon. M. D. Ector, one of the district judges. The appellee, a freedman, was indicted for stealing a mule, and the jury found him guilty, and assessed his punishment at twelve months’ imprisonment in the penitentiary. The court sustained a general motion in arrest of judgment, and the State appealed. The indictment alleged no date on which the offense was committed. The “ then and there ” could therefore only have reference to the place, not the time, for there was none alleged.
1Opinion of the CourtWillie, J.
Neither the time nor place of the commission of the offense charged against the defendant is alleged in this indictment. The words “then and there” are used in the indictment, but not in connection with the averment of the stealing, taking, and carrying away of the property, the time and place of which should be alleged, in order to give jurisdiction to the' court and show that the offense was not barred by limitation. And even if these words were connected with that allegation, they would be wholly insufficient to charge the time at which the theft was committed, because there is no day…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Rhodes v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1884
- State v. HinkleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
- Kirkendall v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1915
- Benson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1935