Prim v. State
Citations
- 32 Tex. 157
Syllabus
<p>1— In indictments for theft, under our statute, it is not necessary to allege an asportation or carrying away of the property stolen.</p> <p>2— In prosecutions for theft, our Code has dispensed with the common law word “feloniously,” and has substituted the word “fraudulently” as expressive of the criminal taking.</p> <p>3— Asportation or removal of the property is not necessary to constitue the crime of theft in this State.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “Asportation is not indispensable to constitute the offense of theft. The offense may be complete without the removal of the property.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Lindsay
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.