Roth v. State

Citations

• 10 Tex. Ct. App. 27

Syllabus

<p>1. Theft—Ventje.—Theft may be prosecuted either in the county where the property was taken or in any other county through or into which it was carried by the thief.</p> <p>2. Same — Gbade of Offense.—If the prosecution be in a county other than that in which the theft was committed, and the evidence shows that the value of the stolen property was enough to make the offense a felony, but that the value of the portion carried into the county of the former was not enough to make the offense a felony, the conviction can be for misdemeanor only.</p> <p>8. Evidence—Pbactice.— If testimony be objectionable as hearsay or because it presupposes the existence of better evidence, its competency must be challenged in the trial court, and cannot be primarily assailed on appeal. ■</p> <p>4. Indictment—Theft of a bank-note is sufficiently charged if the indictment charges theft of a “ bank-bill,”—the latter being the statutory term in this State.</p> <p>5. Vabiance—Idem Sonans.—Indictment charged theft of a note on the “ Chatam National Bank;” but the note as proved and exhibited was on the Chatham National Bank. Held idem, sonans, and not a material variance between the alleged and the proved appellation of the bank.</p>