Harris v. State
| Decision Date | 22 May 1895 |
| Citation | 31 S.W. 382 |
| Parties | HARRIS v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Harris county; E. D. Cavin, Judge.
Will Harris, alias Pet Harris, was convicted of robbery, and appeals. Affirmed.
Thompson & Carter, for appellant. Mann Trice, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The appellant in this case was tried under an indictment charging him with robbery, was convicted, and his punishment assessed at five years' confinement in the penitentiary; and from the judgment and sentence of the lower court he prosecutes this appeal.
Appellant assigns but two errors, the first of which is that the indictment charged that defendant, by means of the robbery, "did take from the person and possession of the prosecutor, Joe Rosentta, $20 in the paper money, and then and there current money of the United States, a better description thereof being to the grand jurors unknown, of the value of $20"; and that the proof showed that the money taken was $15 in paper currency of the United States, to wit, one $10 bill, lawful current money of the United States of the value of $10, and one $5 bill, lawful current money of the United States of the value of $5; and that this shows a variance between the allegations in the indictment and the proof. We do not think so. No denomination of the money is set forth in the indictment. Under our financial system, a dollar is a unit of value, and, under the allegations of this indictment, the state would be permitted to prove any number of currency dollars of the United States (not more than 20 in number), and the proof of $10, currency money of the United States of the value of $10, and a $5 bill, current money of the United States of the value of $5, constitutes no variance with the allegation contained in the indictment.
The second assignment of error is that the evidence is not sufficient to sustain the verdict. We have examined the evidence, and in our opinion, it is sufficient. The prosecutor, Joe Rosentta, testified that he had a store in the city of Houston; that on the night of 26th of November, 1894, he and his niece were alone in the store, and that, about 8 o'clock, two negroes came in, and asked for some onions. One of them had a stick under his arm. The prosecutor's niece was standing at the counter in the back part of the store. He got up and took a paper sack, and stooped down to put the onions in it, and one of the negroes knocked him in the back of the head with...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Howell v. State
...money" from Mr. Sanford. Proof that less money of the same character was taken than that alleged is not a variance. See Harris v. State, 34 Tex.Cr.R. 497, 31 S.W. 382; Pones v. State, 43 Tex.Cr.R. 201, 63, S.W. It is held in the Harris case, supra, that although the allegation was the takin......
-
Sims v. State
...things constitutes the offense. We are not discussing where the value of one or more of the things must constitute the offense. Harris v. State, 31 S. W. 382; Pones v. State, 43 Tex. Cr. R. 201, 63 S. W. 1021; Terry v. State, 136 S. W. This court, in discussing the sufficiency of the eviden......
-
Hoover v. State
...to prove that all the property alleged was taken, and proof of the taking of any part thereof is sufficient in that regard. Harris v. State, 34 Crim 497, 31 S.W. 382; Jones v. State, 43 S.W. 162; Maloney v. State, [Tex.Cr.App.], 45 S.W. 719; White v. State, [Tex.Cr.App.] 57 S.W. 100; Pones ......
-
Bybee v. State
...so between the amount averred and that taken by the appellant, it would not be fatal to the conviction. In the case of Harris v. State, 34 Tex. Cr. R. 497, 31 S. W. 382, the accused was convicted of robbery. The indictment described the property in general terms as $20 in paper money, curre......