From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Herrera v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Feb 19, 1930
24 S.W.2d 1093 (Tex. Crim. App. 1930)

Opinion

No. 13019.

Delivered February 19, 1930.

Theft — Charge — Circumstantial Evidence.

Since the fact of recent possession of stolen property is but a circumstance to be considered by the jury along with other circumstances in the case in determining guilt, appellant was entitled to a charge on the law of circumstantial evidence.

Appeal from the County Court of Guadalupe County. Tried below before the Hon. J. B. Williams, Judge.

Appeal from a conviction for misdemeanor theft; penalty, a fine of $100.00 and one day in the county jail.

The opinion states the case.

J. Ed. Wilkins of San Antonio, for appellant.

A. A. Dawson of Canton, State's Attorney, for the State.


Conviction for misdemeanor theft; punishment, a fine of one hundred dollars, and one day in the county jail.

Appellant was indicted for theft of a cultivator. Shortly after the disappearance of said cultivator from the premises of its owner, same was found in the field rented and worked by appellant. Upon being asked about the cultivator, he said it was his. Another Mexican was present. Both were indicted for this theft. The other Mexican referred to seems to have forfeited his bond and disappeared.

On the trial of the case appellant asked a special charge submitting the law relative to circumstantial evidence, which was refused. We are of opinion that in refusing the charge on circumstantial evidence the learned trial judge fell into error. That appellant claimed the cultivator as his, would not be tantamount to an admission on his part that he fraudulently took it from the owner. Many men have been found in possession of recently stolen property who have advanced one reason or another as explanatory of their apparent claim of ownership, which cases have been held to be upon circumstantial evidence. Beyond doubt the fact of recent possession is but a circumstance to be considered by the jury along with other circumstances in the case in determining guilt.

Because of the refusal of a charge on circumstantial evidence, the judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Herrera v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Feb 19, 1930
24 S.W.2d 1093 (Tex. Crim. App. 1930)
Case details for

Herrera v. State

Case Details

Full title:JESUS HERRERA v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Feb 19, 1930

Citations

24 S.W.2d 1093 (Tex. Crim. App. 1930)
24 S.W.2d 1093

Citing Cases

Barrow v. State

Such should have been given, as the State was forced to rely thereon alone for a conviction, the strongest…