Legal Opinion

Rose v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided November 20, 1907No. 3877PublishedCited by 6 opinions

The opinion states the case.

1Opinion of the Court

DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

This prosecution and conviction was for a misdemeanor theft, the punishment being assessed at $25 fine and two days in the county jail. The court gave the following charge: “You are further instructed the fraudulent taking in order to constitute theft, need not be the talcing from the actual possession of the owner, but if taken without his consent when not in his actual custody with the intent to deprive him of the value thereof and to appropriate it to the use and benefit of the person taking would constitute theft.”

This is an enunciation of a correct rule of law.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Patrick v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1906
  2. Wade v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1895

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Dean v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1941
  2. Mason v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1959
  3. State v. LottNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Morgan v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1935
  5. Watters v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1932

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API