Dupuy v. State, 18874.
| Decision Date | 02 June 1937 |
| Docket Number | No. 18874.,18874. |
| Citation | 106 S.W.2d 287 |
| Parties | DUPUY v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Falls County; Terry Dickens, Judge.
Harry Dupuy was convicted for embezzlement, and he appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
T. B. Bartlett and Prentice Oltorf, both of Marlin (Geo. H. Carter, of Marlin, of counsel), for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
The offense is embezzlement; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for four years.
The proof on the part of the state was to the effect that appellant was the duly elected collector and assessor of taxes of the Marlin Independent School District, and that he embezzled approximately $6,000 belonging to said district, which had come into his possession by virtue of his office as tax collector. The state proved that the school board did not consent to appellant's conversion of said money. Testifying in his own behalf, appellant denied that he had ever had any intention to defraud the district.
The prosecution proceeded under article 1534, P.C., which reads as follows:
"If any officer, agent, clerk, employe, or attorney at law or in fact, of any incorporated company or institution, or any clerk, agent, attorney at law or in fact, servant or employe of any private person, co-partnership or joint stock association, or any consignee or bailee of money or property, shall embezzle, fraudulently misapply or convert to his own use, without the consent of his principal or employer, any money or property of such principal or employer which may have come into his possession or be under his care by virtue of such office, agency or employment, he shall be punished in the same manner as if he had committed a theft of such money or property."
Omitting the formal parts, the count of the indictment under which appellant was convicted reads as follows:
"Harry Dupuy was an agent of an incorporated institution, to-wit, Marlin Independent School District, and the said Harry Dupuy did then and there fraudulently embezzle, misapply and convert to his own use without the consent of the said incorporated institution, certain money belonging to said incorporated institution, to-wit, the sum of Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty-nine and 75/100 ($5,969.75) Dollars, in money, of the value of Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty-nine and 75/100 ($5,969.75) Dollars, which said money had come into the possession and was under the care of said Harry Dupuy by virtue of his said agency."
In El Dorado Independent School District et al. v. Tisdale et al. (Tex.Com.App.) 3 S.W.(2d) 420, 422, it is said: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Standley v. Aldine Independent School Dist.
...and Collector of Taxes of an Independent School District is a public officer and the office is one of emolument. Dupuy v. State, 132 Tex.Cr.R. 539, 106 S.W.2d 287; Dupuy v. State, 135 Tex.Cr.App. 595, 121 S.W.2d 1003; Knox v. Johnson, Tex.Civ.App., 141 S.W.2d 698, (er. ref.); Pruitt v. Glen......
-
Adamson v. State
...he had never qualified, taken the oath, nor given bond as collector for the School District. We held in the case of Dupuy v. State, 132 Tex.Cr.R. 539, 106 S.W.2d 287, and Id., 135 Tex. Cr.R. 595, 121 S.W.2d 1003, that a tax collector for a school district was an officer of the government in......
- Mitchell v. State, 19058.