Castello v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Webb. Tried below before the Hon. Wm. H. Bussell.
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
The property alleged to have been stolen, is not of that class enumerated in the act of November 12th, 1866, unless we can suppose that neat stock or beeves come under the denomination of cattle.
But the indictment is uncertain; it charges the theft of three head of neat stock or beeves. The word beeves may include neat stock, but all néat stock are not beeves, in common or legal parlance. The indictment does not charge the taking of the animals from the possession of any person.
The judgment of the District Court must be reversed and the cause dismissed.
Beversed and remanded.
2Cited by4 opinions
- State ex rel. Esser v. District Court of the Fifth Judicial District of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of NyeNevada Supreme Court · 1918
- Countryman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1907
- Territory of New Mexico v. ChristmanNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1899
- Thomas v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1885