Harding v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
The court charged the jury as to the general definition óf theft, and also submitted to the jury the definition of bailment to be a delivery of personal property to another for some purpose upon a contract expressed or implied that such purpose shall be carried out. The court then instructed the jury as to the law of theft under bailment and then applied said law to the fact's in proof. Also submittted question of purchase.
Read the full summary
The court charged the jury as to the general definition óf theft, and also submitted to the jury the definition of bailment to be a delivery of personal property to another for some purpose upon a contract expressed or implied that such purpose shall be carried out. The court then instructed the jury as to the law of theft under bailment and then applied said law to the fact's in proof. Also submittted question of purchase. By the owner" of the alleged stolen horse the State proved that defendant approached him before the alleged theft, and said that he had about $300 which he got for a lot…
1Opinion of the Court
HEHDERSOH, Judge.
Appellant was charged with the theft of a horse, having acquired the same as a bailment under article 877, Penal Code.
Appellant complains of the method by which he was examined with reference to other offenses, to wit: Counsel for the State asked the following questions: “Berry, how many times have you been charged across there in the county court with the offense of theft in the last two years?” And again, “Berry, do you remember on the 27th day of February of this year of stealing a coat from a fellow named Beeler ?” To the first question, defendant answered he did not…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Lee v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1916
- Matthews v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1916
- Williams v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1916