Willis v. State

Citations

• 24 Tex. Ct. App. 584
• 6 S.W. 856
• 1888 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 12

Syllabus

<p>1. Theft—Evidence— Charge of the Court.—Upon a trial for theft-possession of the stolen property being the inculpatory fact—the State was correctly permitted to prove the defendant’s contemporaneous possession of other stolen animals than that described in the indictment; such proof being admissible upon the question of identity in developing the res gestae, or to prove by the circumstances the theft on trial, or the intent of the accused with respect to the animal named in the indictment. But, in failing to limit such proof to such purpose, the charge was materially defective.</p> <p>2. Same.—An essential element of the crime of theft is that the property was taken by the accused with intent to appropriate the same to his own use and benefit. In the general charge in this case, this element, in the application of the law to the facts, was omitted. Held: That, in view of the proof on the trial, the omission was error.</p> <p>3. Same.—The defense requested a special charge, as follows: “If Boyd bought the cow from Mixon, whether in good or bad faith, and defend ant’s connection with the cow was only to aid in disposing of said cow— in other words, if said cow was stolen by some one else than defendant, and sold to Boyd—then defendant’s subsequent connection with the cow would not he theft, and, if you so find, you will acquit the defendant.” Held: That, in view of the evidence on the trial, the refusal of the special charge was error.</p>