Jones v. State

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Appellant renews his claim that the indictment is bad because it alleges in several places that by fraudulent pretenses, etc. this appellant did obtain the money of Johnson, — the point being again made that the indictment should have averred that appellant acquired said money. In our former opinion, upon the authority of various sections of accompanying statutes, we said it seemed in the swindling statute that the legislature had used the words acquired and obtained as meaning substantially the same thing. We are still of that opinion. Article 1545,…