Clark v. State

Appellant was convicted of the offense of concealing stolen property.

The property involved was certain Michelin automobile casings and certain spark plugs. The State relied upon circumstantial evidence, a part of which consisted of verbal statements made by the appellant. The error complained of is predicated upon the proposition that these statements were made while appellant was under arrest, unwarned and were such as the State was inhibited from using by the terms of article 810, C.C.P.

The deputy sheriff, having appellant under suspicion of committing the offense, went to appellant's place…