Gammel v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
HAWKINS, Judge.
The facts are stated in the original opinion. It is the theory of the state that Hill, the accomplice witness, stole certain property and sold it to appellant, and that appellant knew the property was stolen.
Complaint is made of the failure of the court to read to the jury Special Charge No. 7, containing the following language: “Gentlemen of the Jury: In connection with the necessity for the corroboration of accomplices’ testimony, you are instructed that the accomplice must be corroborated both as to the theft of the stolen property — if any — and also…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Linder v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1922
- Boaz v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1920
- Bell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1924
- Crouchett v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Parker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1923
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.