Conners v. State, 19618.
Decision Date | 06 April 1938 |
Docket Number | No. 19618.,19618. |
Citation | 115 S.W.2d 681 |
Parties | CONNERS v. STATE. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from Criminal District Court, Jefferson County; Robt. A. Shivers, Judge.
Woody F. Conners was convicted of burglary, and he appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
D. F. Sanders and J. A. Veillon, both of Beaumont, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
The offense is burglary; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.
On the night of the 17th of June, 1937, the place of business of Luther Massey was burglariously entered and a Ford automobile taken therefrom. Recently after the burglary appellant was found in possession of the stolen car. The burglar removed the numbers from a Buick automobile which was also in the building. Finger prints were taken from the Buick, and, after he had been arrested, officers took appellant's finger prints. The prints upon the automobile correspond with those of the appellant.
In bill of exception No. 1 complaint is made of the action of the trial court in permitting the State to prove that appellant's finger prints were taken while he was under arrest. Appellant's contention that the reception of such evidence was violative of section 10 of the Bill of Rights cannot be sustained. In McGarry v. State, 82 Tex.Cr.R. 597, 200 S.W. 527, 528, this court said:
Appellant timely and properly excepted to the charge of the court for its failure to submit an instruction on the law of circumstantial evidence. In declining to respond to the exception the court fell into error. Finger prints, while admissible, are not conclusive as to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Olson v. State
...218, 220 (Tex.Cr.App.1914). 16 Texas Constitution: McGarry v. State, 82 Tex.Cr.R. 597, 200 S.W. 527, 528 (1918); Conners v. State, 134 Tex.Cr.R. 278, 115 S.W.2d 681 (1938); Mendez v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 362 S.W.2d 841 (1962); Bonner v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 375 S.W.2d 723 (1964); Harrington v......
-
State v. Rogers
...658, 182 S.W.2d 384; People v. Jones, 112 Cal.App. 68, 296 P. 317; Bartletta v. McFeeley, 107 N.J.Eq. 141, 152 A. 17; Conners v. State, 134 Tex.Cr.R. 278, 115 S.W.2d 681; McGarry v. State, 82 Tex. Cr.R. 597, 200 S.W. 527; Owens v. Commonwealth, 186 Va. 689, 43 S.E.2d Simon Greenleaf, a mast......
-
State v. Lei
...S.E.2d 895; State v. Watson, 1946, 114 Vt. 543, 49 A.2d 174; Shannon v. State, 1944, 207 Ark. 658, 182 S.W.2d 384; Conners v. State, 1938, 134 Tex.Cr.R. 278, 115 S.W.2d 681; People v. Les, 1934, 267 Mich. 648, 255 N.W. 407; State v. Johnson, 1932, 111 W.Va. 653, 164 S.E. 31; People v. Jones......
-
Grice v. State, 21458.
...conclusion as to what was decided in the three cases referred to. This doctrine, however, was recalled in the case of Conners v. State, 134 Tex.Cr.R. 278, 115 S.W.2d 681, decided in 1938, which appears to be the last expression by this court on the subject, and the Davis case is the sole au......