Davison v. State

Citations

• 12 Tex. Ct. App. 214

Syllabus

<p>1. Theft.—The term “property” in the statutory definition of theft includes money, bank-bills, and all articles commonly known as personal property; and an indictment which charged the theft of “four one-half dollar silver pieces, United States silver coin, of the denomination and value of fifty cents each ” sufficiently described money alleged to have been stolen.</p> <p>2. Same—Swindling.— Little if any difference exists between swindling as defined in article 790 of the Penal Code and that species of theft in which, according to article 727, the taking, though originally lawful, was obtained by false pretext or with the felonious intents characteristic of the offense; and the same punishment is prescribed for both offenses.</p> <p>3. Same.— Under an ordinary indictment for theft a conviction may, upon the proper proof, be had for swindling. See the opinion in extenso on the subject.</p> <p>4. Evidence.— See evidence which, it is held, would sustain a conviction either for theft or swindling.</p> <p>5. Same.—In a trial for theft of the money of one W., the latter testified that the defendant, under a false name and by falsely representing himself as authorized to solicit and receive subscriptions for certain magazines, obtained money of the witness, who never received the magazines. The State was allowed to elicit from two other witnesses the fact that the defendant obtained money from them about the same time and in the same manner, with the like result. Held, that this evidence was admissible to establish the identity and the fraudulent intent of the defendant.</p>