Legal Opinion

Palermo v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided April 10, 1935No. 17502Published

The opinion states the case.

1Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Appellant insists in his motion that the testimony did not demonstrate the use of any diligence on the part of the grand jury to ascertain the name of the party from whom it is alleged appellant received the alleged stolen property, for the receiving of which he stands convicted in this case. Neither our statute nor the authorities hold that it is necessary for the evidence to so show, and unless there be an issue made by the accused in the development of the case upon this proposition, and it be shown that reasonable diligence was not in fact used, we…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Link v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1914
  2. Martin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1916
  3. McCarty v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1896

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API