Isaacs v. State

Citations

• 30 Tex. 450

Syllabus

<p>Where the proof was that the accused took the tobacco openly, without any attempt at concealment, it should have been left to the jury to determine whether, under all the circumstances, the party intended theft, and the court should have at least defined theft.in the language of the statute. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 2381, Note 683.)</p> <p>One of the most material considerations respecting the “ taking,” to constitute theft, is, whether the act was done animo furandi.</p> <p>In an indictment for theft, the property stolen may be laid in the true owner or in the bailee; but to sustain a conviction, the proof must correspond with the averment of ownership, and when, on the trial, the question of ownership is raised, the defendant has the right to have it submitted to the jury.</p>