Jurado v. State

• Decision Date: 15 March 1922
• Docket Number: (No. 6771.)
• Citation: 239 S.W. 617
• Parties: JURADO v. STATE.
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

239 S.W. 617

JURADO v. STATE.

(No. 6771.)

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 15, 1922.

Rehearing Denied April 12, 1922.

Appeal from District Court, El Paso County; W. D. Howe, Judge.

Guillermo Jurado was convicted of receiving and concealing stolen property, knowing it to have been stolen, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Owen & Bridgers, of El Paso, for appellant.

R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

HAWKINS, J.

Conviction is for receiving and concealing stolen property over the value of $50 knowing the same to have been stolen. Punishment was assessed at two years' confinement in the penitentiary.

There are no bills of exception in the record, and only two questions are raised in the motion for new trial, one being as to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction, the other alleging misconduct of the jury. The latter matter cannot be considered by us. No bill of exception appears in the record to the action of the court in overruling motion for new trial upon this point, and the evidence taken upon the motion for new trial upon this issue was not filed during the term of court at which conviction was had. We find in the general statement of facts the testimony of some of the jurors, but this was not filed in the lower court until November 4, 1921, court having adjourned on October 1, 1921. Under this state of the record the alleged misconduct of the jury cannot be reviewed by us. See Probest v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 608, 133 S. W. 263, and cases therein referred to. Also Hart v. State, 86 Tex. Cr. R. 653, 218 S. W. 1054; Parroccini v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 234 S. W. 671.

H. S. Appelby was in the harness and wagon business in the city of El Paso. About 8 o'clock in the morning two saddles were stolen from in front of his place of business, where they had been placed for display. A few days afterwards they were found by the officers in an unused toilet in the rear of an apartment house belonging to appellant. The door to the closet was locked and nailed up at the time the officers recovered the property. The theft was established beyond question, as was also the value of the property as being over $50.

Andres Dominguez, a witness for the state, testified substantially that he was in the grocery business in the house adjoining the premises owned by appellant where the stolen property was found. A day or two before the saddles were recovered this witness saw Francisco Alanis and Juan Huerta drive up in an automobile in front of the alley or passageway between witness' store and the apartments in question, and take out of the automobile two bundles (which were afterwards discovered to be the saddles in question) and take them to the back of Jurado's premises. A short time after they came up in their automobile Jurado drove up in the opposite direction in his car, and also went to the back of his premises, and witness saw appellant, Alanis, and Huerta talking together. Alanis and Huerta left. Appellant went up stairs in the apartment house, and, after remaining there a little while, he also left. When witness saw appellant go to the back of his apartment Alanis, Huerta, and he were standing near the toilet from which the property was afterwards recovered. Witness heard nothing that was said between appellant and the two parties, but noticed that when they left they did not have the bundles with them. This witness claims that appellant, Alanis and Huerta all came out from back of the apartment together.

Rebecca Martinez was acquainted with appellant and Alanis but did not know Huerta. This witness saw appellant, Alanis, and another party whom she did not know pass by her mother's apartment and go in at the back of appellant's apartment, and heard appellant say to the other two "not to put him in danger with the things they had, to get them out there quick." Appellant was not carrying anything, but the other two were carrying a bundle each. After the three left she went into what she called the corral (the yard back of the apartment house) and found the two saddles which were wrapped up in a blanket.

Francisco Alanis testified that on the day the saddles were stolen appellant and Huerta were in an automobile and called him to them, and appellant got out of the car, and that he and Huerta went and got the saddles and brought them to appellant's apartment, and put the saddles in the toilet. He claims it was locked at the time, and that appellant unlocked it. He says appellant did not help take the saddles out of the car, nor was he with them at the time they secured the saddles, but that appellant opened the door, and he (witness) and Huerta put them in the toilet; that appellant gave him (witness) a dollar, which he gave to the driver of the automobile in which they had...