Mullins v. State
Decision Date | 30 October 1895 |
Parties | MULLINS v. STATE. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Gonzales county; T. H. Spooner, Judge.
Wes Mullins was convicted of burglary with intent to steal, and appeals. Affirmed.
C. K. Walter, for appellant. Mann Trice, for the State.
This conviction was for burglary with intent to steal. Attached to his motion for a new trial is appellant's affidavit, in which he states that, by some misunderstanding, counsel supposed to have been employed to defend him did not appear in his behalf, and it would seem that this failure was attributable to the fact that he did not pay or secure their fee. Nothing seems to have been said in regard to this matter until after his conviction. How this could possibly constitute a ground for a new trial is not apparent.
It is insisted that the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction, because it fails to show with sufficient certainty his intent to steal when he entered the house. The alleged owner, Mrs. Hamburger, testified in this connection: This was at night. Miss Pelte testified: It is beyond...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Melton
...So. 833 (1908); People v. Noon, 1 Cal.App. 44, 81 P. 746 (1905); State v. Worthen, 111 Iowa 267, 82 N.W. 910 (1900); Mullins v. State, 35 Tex.Cr.R. 149, 32 S.W. 691 (1895); Alexander v. State, 31 Tex.Cr.R. 359, 20 S.W. 756 (1892); Steadman v. State, 81 Ga. 736, 8 S.E. 420 (1888); State v. M......
-
State v. Woodruff
...97 N. C. 393, 1 S. E. 925;Cady v. U. S., 54 App. D. C. 10, 293 F. 829;Smith v. State, 51 Tex. Cr. R. 427, 102 S. W. 406;Mullens v. State, 35 Tex. Cr. R. 149, 32 S. W. 691;Alexander v. State, 31 Tex. Cr. R. 359, 20 S. W. 756; 4 R. C. L. 441. Many other authorities upon this proposition could......
-
Dimery v. State
...that it is not supported by the facts. Branch's P.C., Sec. 2344; Alexander v. State, 31 Tex.Cr.R. 359, 20 S.W. 756; Mullins v. State, 35 Tex.Cr.R. 149, 32 S.W. 691; Smith v. State, 51 Tex.Cr.R. 427, 102 S.W. 406; Black v. State, 73 Tex.Cr.R. 475, 165 S.W. 571; Love v. State, 82 Tex.Cr.R. 41......
-
Aguilar v. State
...inference. See, Hardesty v. State, 656 S.W.2d 73 (Tex.Cr.App.1983). For the inauspicious genesis of the rule, see Mullins v. State, 35 Tex.Crim. 149, 32 S.W. 691 (1895) and Alexander v. State, 31 Tex.Crim. 359, 20 S.W. 756 (1892).1 All emphasis is supplied throughout by the writer of this o......