Roberts v. State

• Decision Date: 23 February 1910
• Citation: 126 S.W. 1129
• Parties: ROBERTS v. STATE.
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

126 S.W. 1129

ROBERTS v. STATE.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

February 23, 1910.

Rehearing Denied April 13, 1910.

Appeal from Erath County Court; J. B. Keith, Judge.

Tell Roberts was convicted of violating the liquor laws, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Young & Johnson, for appellant. John A. Mobley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

RAMSEY, J.

By information filed in the county court of Erath county on the 26th day of July, 1909, appellant was charged with the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors in said county to one E. R. Snead, and also with pursuing the business of selling intoxicating liquors in said county without having paid the taxes imposed by law for so doing. On a trial had in said county on September 15th thereafter, he was convicted on the first count, and his punishment was assessed at a fine of $25 and 20 days' confinement in the county jail.

The evidence shows that appellant was, in April, 1908, traveling for a brewery located and doing business in Houston, Harris county, Tex. He describes himself as general foreman around the brewery, and his occupation that of traveling for the brewery selling Hiawatha. The evidence of the state tended to show that about the 1st day of April, 1908, in the city of Dublin, in Erath county, appellant sold to E. R. Snead a barrel or cask of Hiawatha, and delivered it to him, and received $10 therefor. Describing the transaction, the witness Snead makes this statement: "When I bought it from him, I paid him for it, and he then went off and got it. You heard what I said about swearing he delivered it to be his. He said down there he could guarantee it not to be intoxicating, and that any child could drink it. Yes; I said I told him I would take a barrel of it. I paid him in my joint down there for it, and he went off and got it, and delivered it to me. No; I don't know where he got it. I know I paid the money for it, and that is all I know about it."

Appellant admitted, to some extent, the incriminatory facts. He states that before this he had been selling to one Hammers, but that he preferred to sell to Snead, because, as he says, he was in better circumstances than Hammers; that on the day in question he saw Hammers. Thereupon he proceeds to state the circumstances as follows: "He told me he saw Bob the other day, and Bob wanted to buy some Hiawatha, and so I thought I would just go down there and sell him, and after I said to him that it come in casks he reached down in his pocket and handed me $10 and told me to go and get him one. He gave me the money, and I took it to Hammers, and gave him the $10, and by that time the wagon was coming up to the back, and we loaded it in, and it was settled. I was not acting for Hammers in that deal. In this way I was handling it for Snead from Hammers. I got no profit out of it." On cross-examination he made the following statement touching this matter: "I testified about this transaction in the district court in July, and at that time I may have said that I sold this Hiawatha to Mr. Snead, for Mr. Hammers."

Hammers, to whom he refers, was introduced for the state, and testified, among other things, to this effect: "I remember Mr. Tell Roberts being in my place some time about the 1st of April, 1908, and took a cask of this Hiawatha from my place. He took a cask of it, and put the money in the money box. He told me he had sold it to Mr. Bob Snead. He made this remark when he rolled the cask out of the house, and in the rear of the building." On cross-examination, touching this same matter, he makes this statement: "Yes, all right, now, about this transaction, it was about like this: I had some Hiawatha down...