Boren v. State

Citations

• 23 Tex. Ct. App. 28
• 4 S.W. 463
• 1887 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 29

Syllabus

<p>1. Theft—Ownership—Charge of the Court.—The first count in the indictment alleged the ownership of the stolen property to be unknown, and the second count alleged it to be in one S. The proof sustained the second count. Held, that a conviction could be had only under the second count, and therefore the trial court should have confined its charge to that count.</p> <p>2. Same—Joinder of Offenses.—An indictment in several counts is a collection of several bills against the same defendant, for offenses which on their faces appear distinct, under one caption, and found and indorsed collectively as true by the grand jury. The object is to charge the defendant with distinct offenses, under the idea that the court may, as often as it will, allow them to be tried together, thus averting from both parties the burden of two or more trials; or, in another class of cases, to vary what is meant to be one accusation, so as, at the trial, to avoid an acquittal by an unforeseen lack of harmony between allegation and proof, or a legal doubt as to what form of charge the court will approve. The objection urged to the second count in this indictment is that the Eugene Boren therein charged is not alleged, by the descriptive words “the said” or their equivalent, to be the same Eugene Boren charged in the first count; and the same objection is applied to the property. Held, that the objection is hypercritical. See the opinion on the question.</p> <p>3. Same—Repugnancy—Verdict.—Under the practice of this State a general verdict responds sufficiently to an indictment containing two good counts, and is likewise sufficient under an indictment containing one good and one bad count, inasmuch as it will be assignable to the former. See the opinion in extenso on the doctrine of repugnancy.</p> <p>4. Practice—Jury Law.—A juror who tried the case qualified himself on his voir dire by declaring himself a freeholder in the State. It transpired after the trial that he was neither a freeholder in