Malz v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Defendant’s motion to quash the complaint was overruled, and the complaint was permitted to be amended. The evidence shows that appellant was a clerk for one Fair, a pawn broker.
Read the full summary
Defendant’s motion to quash the complaint was overruled, and the complaint was permitted to be amended. The evidence shows that appellant was a clerk for one Fair, a pawn broker. That one Jackson, a negro, came into the store, during Fair’s absence, and left a watch there, appellant having paid him $1. There is a direct conflict as to whether appellant bought the watch for the $1, or whether Jackson pawned it to him for the $1, upon the understanding and agreement that he could redeem it, within two weeks, for $1.35. Appellant sold the watch to one Williamson for $2, and paid the proceeds…
1Opinion of the Court
HENDERSON, Judge.
The appellant was convicted, under Penal Code, Art. 742a, for theft, by conversion of property intrusted to him as a bailee, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $75 and sixty days’ imprisonment in the county jail, and from the judgment of the lower court he prosecutes this appeal. The only contention of appellant that requires to be noticed is the exception taken by him to the action of the court in allowing the County Attorney to amend the complaint on which the information in this case was predicated. It appears the complaint originally read, in the beginning part,…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Lee v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1916
- Northcutt v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1910
- A. C. Nelsen Auto Sales, Inc. v. TurnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1950
- Livingston v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1898
- Essex v. FifeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.