King v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Bell. Tried below before the Hon. J. P. Osterhout. The defendant had before been convicted on a charge of stealing from one Large the gelding which in this case he was charged with having stolen from Parley. It appears from the evidence that both charges were true.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Bell. Tried below before the Hon. J. P. Osterhout. The defendant had before been convicted on a charge of stealing from one Large the gelding which in this case he was charged with having stolen from Parley. It appears from the evidence that both charges were true. An effort was made to plead the former conviction, in which it was alleged that the animal belonged to Large at the time stated in the indictment, and that defendant had before been convicted for stealing the animal from Large, but no facts were stated showing that the two charges were for the same offense. Verdict…
1Opinion of the Court
Roberts, Chief Justice.
The plea of autrefois convict was' defective, and was properly set aside. It did not state facts showing that this and the former prosecution for stealing the gelding were for the same offense; nor could it have done so truthfully, as shown by the evidence in this case.
The defendant stole this gelding from Large, sold him to Farley, and then stole him from Farley, to whom he had sold him, and who had him in possession when he was stolen the last time.
The indictment in this case alleged him to be the property of Farley, and the judge charged the jury that under such a…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Creech v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1913
- Torrence v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1919
- Black v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
- Kelly v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Smith v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1926
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.