McKnight v. State, 37954
| Decision Date | 10 March 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 37954,37954 |
| Citation | 387 S.W.2d 662 |
| Parties | Hershel McKNIGHT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Royce E. Ball, Lubbock, for appellant.
Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The offense is felony theft; the punishment, two years.
Our able state's attorney does not seek an affirmance of this conviction, and we agree that this cause must be reversed.The indictment alleged that appellant and one James Elmer Firestone stole a number of mechanical items, but no value is attributed to them either singularly or collectively.It is essential in all cases of theft, except in theft from the person and theft of certain animals such as horses, mules, cattle, etc., to allege the value of the property so that the indictment may show upon its face that the court has jurisdiction of the offense.This identical question was before the Court in Steel v. State, Tex.Cr.App.,...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
5 cases
-
Escobar v. State, 01-14-00593-CR
...693 S.W.2d 448, 450 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985); Christiansen v. State, 575 S.W.2d 42, 44 (Tex.Crim. App. 1979); McKnight v. State, 387 S.W.2d 662, 663 (Tex. Crim. App. 1965).B. Analysis Here, appellant fails to meet the second prong of the test for lesser-included offenses, i.e., there is no ev......
-
Ramirez v. State
...693 S.W.2d 448, 450 (Tex.Crim.App.1985); Christiansen v. State, 575 S.W.2d 42, 44 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1979); McKnight v. State, 387 S.W.2d 662, 663 (Tex.Crim.App.1965). The record in this case reflects that appellant stole a 2004 Toyota Tacoma. The truck was described as black and ha......
-
Craver v. State, 02-14-00076-CR
...448, 450 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985); Christiansen v. State, 575 S.W.2d 42, 44 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1979); McKnight v. State, 387 S.W.2d 662, 663 (Tex. Crim. App. 1965). Here, neither party introduced any evidence of the value of the items Craver took from Sears; thus, without evidence o......
-
Ramirez v. State
...448, 450 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985); Christiansen v. State, 575 S.W.2d 42, 44 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1979); McKnight v. State, 387 S.W.2d 662, 663 (Tex. Crim. App. 1965). The record in this case reflects that appellant stole a 2004 Toyota Tacoma. The truck was described as black and havin......
Get Started for Free