Potter v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Cameron. Tried below before .the Hon. Wm. H. Russell. Potter was indicted and convicted, upon an indictment charging “that Walter Potter * * on the twenty-fifth day of December, 1872,- in the county aforesaid, did then and there feloniously, willfully and fraudulently take, •steal and carry away from the house ’of. one Teófila Chares, then and there situated, and from the possession of her the said Teófila Chares, one certain trunk or chest, containing various…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cameron. Tried below before .the Hon. Wm. H. Russell. Potter was indicted and convicted, upon an indictment charging “that Walter Potter * * on the twenty-fifth day of December, 1872,- in the county aforesaid, did then and there feloniously, willfully and fraudulently take, •steal and carry away from the house ’of. one Teófila Chares, then and there situated, and from the possession of her the said Teófila Chares, one certain trunk or chest, containing various articles of clothing, .jewelry,” etc., “of the value of $20, without the consent,” etc.
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
The charge in this case is theft from a house, and the indictment sets forth the larceny of a trunk or chest containing various articles of clothing, jewelry, etc., of the value of $90. There is a difference in common parlance between the words chest and trunk, and although there may be a similarity between the articles thus named in their uses and purposes, yet there is .an actual difference between the two articles. This indictment, then, is in the alternative and is bad. The trunk or chest is described as containing various articles of clothing, jewelry, etc., of the value of $90. We are…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. CollettIdaho Supreme Court · 1904
- Countryman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1907
- Thomas v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1885