Fuller v. State

• Decision Date: 04 March 1925
• Docket Number: (No. 8555.)
• Citation: 270 S.W. 169
• Parties: FULLER v. STATE.
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

270 S.W. 169

FULLER v. STATE.

(No. 8555.)

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 4, 1925.

Rehearing Denied April 1, 1925.

Appeal from District Court, Parker County; F. O. McKinsey, Judge.

Tom Fuller was convicted of receiving and concealing stolen property, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Carter & Queen of Weatherford, for appellant.

Tom Garrard, State's Atty., and Grover C. Morris, Asst. State's Atty., both of Austin, for the State.

MORROW, P. J.

The offense is receiving and concealing stolen property; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

There were three counts in the indictment. The first charged the theft of an automobile from Arthur James; the second charged that appellant fraudulently received stolen property in Palo Pinto county and brought it into Parker county; the third charged that appellant, in Parker county, fraudulently received property which was stolen in Palo Pinto county. Both the second and third counts charged that the property was received from some person unknown to the grand jurors.

The Ford automobile of Arthur James was stolen by some one from his garage situated in Gordon, in Palo Pinto county, on the night of March 20th. There were circumstances indicating that two persons took part in the theft. Soon after it was stolen the car was found hidden in the pasture of the witness Babb, who resided in Parker county, near Garner, where the appellant resided with his father and mother. The witnesses who discovered the car, while on their way back to watch it, met a person driving a chassis without lights. These witnesses identified the appellant as the driver; at least they said that was their best judgment. The chassis was followed to the home of the appellant's father, and it was there identified as that of the stolen car. Upon returning to the place where the car had been first discovered there was evidence showing that parts of the car had been burned, and nearby was seen a man who was identified as the appellant. He fled, and was pursued, but not overtaken.

Near the place where the car was found there was also found a gasoline can coinciding in size and appearance with that which had been seen in the possession of the appellant. Upon finding the car upon the premises of the appellant's father the parties made a search for the appellant. It was late in the night, and the bed in the appellant's room appeared to have been occupied, but the appellant was not found for some days.

The statement of facts is voluminous. Much of it is a transcription of the stenographer's notes in question and...