Dozier v. State, 30050

Decision Date12 November 1958
Docket NumberNo. 30050,30050
Citation318 S.W.2d 80,167 Tex.Crim. 84
PartiesMonroe DOZIER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Justice, Justice & Kugle, Athens, Wm. Wayne Justice, Athens, of counsel, for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Judge.

The conviction is for burglary; the punishment, enhanced by reason of a prior conviction for burglary of a private residence, twelve years.

The residence of the prosecuting witness, E. L. Andrews, located north of Blooming Grove in Navarro County, was burglarized and all of the dishes, pillows, quilts and blankets, an electric teakettle, cooking utensils, silverware, and their supply of frozen foods, were taken.

The electric teakettle was recovered at a pawnshop in Odessa upon information given by appellant. It had been pawned in appellant's name.

Earl England, one of the burglars, a State's witness, admitted his part in the burglary and testified that appellant and three others were with him; that on the day in question the five of them went to Blooming Grove and then to Odessa, carrying with them the property taken from the Andrews house which one of them entered through a broken window from which he had removed the pasteboard. Appellant, according to this witness, went onto the porch but did not himself enter the house.

The court submitted in his charge the law of principals.

The point upon which reversal is sought advances the theory that the State failed to prove that the burglary occurred in the day time and therefore 'the case was not taken out of the statute defining burglary of a private residence at night.'

In the first place, we think that there is sufficient evidence to support a finding that the house was burglarized in the day time. There is none to show a nighttime burglary.

Mr. Andrews testified that he and his wife 'had done some work around the barn and had went down to the tank to fish a little bit' and when they returned they found their property missing.

The accomplice witness was asked where he and his companions went 'that day' and he replied 'We went to Blooming Grove and then to Odessa.'

There was no allegation in the indictment that the burglary was committed in the day time or at night, and none was requisite, it being alleged that the entry was by force and breaking. See Adcock v. State, 151 Tex.Cr.R. 452, 209 S.W.2d 174; Stout v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 537, 155 S.W.2d 374; Castro v. State, 115 Tex.Cr.R. 291, 29 S.W.2d 760.

The State was under no burden to establish that the defendant was not guilty of some other offense. Its burden was to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the offense charged in the indictment.

Had the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Ovalles v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • October 4, 2018
    ...v. State , 385 S.W.2d 392, 394 (Tex. Crim. App. 1964).52 385 S.W.2d 392 (Tex. Crim. App. 1964).53 Id. at 393.54 167 Tex.Crim. 84, 318 S.W.2d 80 (Tex. Crim. App. 1958).55 Id. at 82.56 Ind. Code § 35-50-2–8.57 Moore v. State , 769 N.E.2d 1141, 1146 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) ; see also Seay v. Stat......
  • Breen v. Beto
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • January 28, 1965
    ...S.W.2d 811, cert. denied 348 U.S. 838, 75 S.Ct. 38, 99 L.Ed. 661; Finley v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 458, 278 S.W.2d 864; Dozier v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 84, 318 S.W.2d 80, cert. denied, 361 U.S. 849, 80 S.Ct. 107, 4 L.Ed.2d 88; Welch v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 425, 341 S.W.2d 909; Ex parte Breen, ......
  • Montgomery v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • October 4, 1982
    ...as here, and this procedure has been upheld in both federal and state courts. Tomlin v. Beto, 377 F.2d 276 (1967); Dozier v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 84, 318 S.W.2d 80 (1958). Here, we hold there was no infringement upon appellant's state and federal constitutional Affirmed. ...
  • Crocker v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • December 9, 1964
    ...S.W.2d 811, cert. denied, 348 U.S. 838, 75 S.Ct. 38, 99 L.Ed. 661; Finley v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 458, 278 S.W.2d 864; Dozier v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 84, 318 S.W.2d 80, cert. denied, 361 U.S. 849, 80 S.Ct. 107, 4 L.Ed.2d 88; Welch v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 425, 341 S.W.2d 909; Ex Parte Breen,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT