Dodd v. State, 23307.
| Decision Date | 17 April 1946 |
| Docket Number | No. 23307.,23307. |
| Citation | 193 S.W.2d 819 |
| Parties | DODD v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from Delta County Court; C. V. Stephenson, Judge.
J. H. Dodd was convicted of the unlawful possession of whisky for the purpose of sale in a dry area, and he appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
C. C. McKinney, of Cooper, for appellant.
Ernest S. Goens, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
The unlawful possession of whisky for the purpose of sale in a dry area is the offense; the punishment, a fine of $500 enhanced by reason of a prior conviction for an offense of like nature.
Appellant's farm was situated on what is known as the "County-Line Road," which road is a boundary line between Delta and Hunt Counties. His residence was located on a sixty-acre tract in Delta County; his twenty-eight acre pasture lay immediately across the road in Hunt County. Each of the counties was a dry area, within the meaning of the Liquor Control Act. Vernon's Ann.P.C. art. 666—1 et seq.
The officers made a search of appellant's residence and, as a result, found therein two empty pint bottles which had recently contained whisky. In a cotton field adjoining the twenty-eight acre pasture, there was found, partly hidden with dirt and under a cotton stalk, a pint of whisky. In a cane patch adjoining the cotton field, there was found a sack containing eleven pints of whisky. The place where the one pint was found in the cotton field, although in Hunt County, was within four hundred yards of the Delta County line; the place where the eleven pints of whisky were found in the cane patch was more than four hundred yards from the Delta County line. Neither the cotton field nor cane patch belonged to or was under the control of the appellant. No whisky was found in appellant's physical possession or upon premises under his control.
It is for the possession of the one pint of whisky found in the cotton field that the State ultimately relies to support this conviction, inasmuch as the eleven pints of whisky found in the cane patch were in Hunt County and more than four hundred yards from the Delta County line. To show appellant's possession of that pint of whisky, the State relies mainly upon tracks —automobile and foot.
After the officers had completed the search of appellant's residence and premises, some of the officers crossed the road to the twenty-eight acre pasture. There they found where an automobile had entered through a gate. They were able to trace the tracks thereof across the pasture to the cotton field. There the car stopped. Foot-tracks made by some person wearing boots or boot-slippers were then found which were traced to the point where the one pint of whisky was found. These same boot-tracks were then traced into the cane patch and to where the eleven pints of whisky were found, and then traced back to the car. The car-tracks were followed back across the pasture to the original point of entry.
To show that appellant was the driver of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lacy v. State, 40821
...S.W.2d 214; Carroll v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 533, 244 S.W.2d 828; Morrison v. State, 155 Tex.Cr.R. 106, 230 S.W.2d 808; Dodd v. State, 149 Tex.Cr.App. 278, 193 S.W.2d 819; Lawson v. State, 148 Tex. Cr.R. 140, 185 S.W.2d 439; Smiley v. State, 146 Tex.Cr.R. 342, 174 S.W.2d 973; Woodruff v. Sta......
-
Garrett v. State
...'* * * (M)ere similarity of tracks, standing alone, is not sufficient to connect one with the commission of crime.' Dodd v. State, 149 Tex.Cr.R. 278, 193 S.W.2d 819, 820. See also Harris v. State, 163 Tex.Cr.R. 519, 294 S.W.2d 123; Gilbreath v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 616, 259 S.W.2d 223; Thom......
-
Fletcher v. State, 30576
...and find the facts in the cases cited different in many material respects to the facts in the present case. In Dodd v. State, 149 Tex.Cr.R. 278, 193 S.W.2d 819, and George v. State, 144 Tex.Cr.R. 183, 162 S.W.2d 110, the State relied upon tracks alone to show that the accused possessed the ......
-
Harris v. State, 28450
...State, 100 Tex.Cr.R. 43, 271 S.W. 913; Gilbreath v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 616, 259 S.W.2d 223. The facts in the case of Dodd v. State, 149 Tex.Cr.R. 278, 193 S.W.2d 819, where the above rule was applied, which have a striking similarity to the instant facts, were held to be insufficient to s......