Shannon v. State

Decision Date15 June 1960
Docket NumberNo. 31720,31720
Citation338 S.W.2d 462,170 Tex.Crim. 91
PartiesCharles Henry SHANNON, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Ralph L. Bell, Edinburg, B. F. Patterson, San Antonio, for appellant.

Charles J. Lieck, Jr., Crim. Dist. Atty., Roy H. Garwood, Jr., Harry A. Nass, Jr.; Asst. Crim. Dist. Attys., San Antonio, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

Our prior opinion is withdrawn, and the following is substituted in lieu thereof.

The offense is felony theft, with two prior convictions for felonies less than capital alleged for enhancement; the punishment, life.

The witness Pitts, a waiter at the Swank Club in San Antonio, testified that on the night in question he saw appellant run through the dining room in a stooped position holding something near his belt and a second later Miss Arbuckle, who was assistant manager of the club and who was dead at the time of the trial, came to the door of the office and hollered, 'Stop him, he just robbed me * * *,' that he gave chase and followed appellant until he was apprehended in an alley nearby.

Fred Serur, the owner of the club, participated in the chase after appellant, and when he returned to the club ascertained that $120 was missing from his change box and the checks which had been in such box were scattered over the floor.

When the officers apprehended appellant in the alley, he dropped a roll of coins on the ground, and from his person was recovered $119 in the following denominations: $45 in one dollar bills, two tens, three fives, $20 in quarters, $6 in nickels, and $10 in dimes.

Appellant, testifying in his own behalf, admitted the two prior convictions in the State of Illinois, one for robbery in 1935 and one for larceny in 1942, and that he had served such sentences. He further testified that he had been intimate with Miss Arbuckle but had broken off his relationship with her and married another woman, that Miss Arbuckle knew of his criminal record in the State of Illinois and had threatened to 'make trouble' for him after his marriage. He stated that he went to the club on the night in question, that Miss Arbuckle invited him in the manager's office, that an argument between them ensued, after which he left. He stated that he did not hear Miss Arbuckle say that she had been robbed and that he started running after he left the club because he heard someone running behind him. He denied that he had taken any money from the club. Appellant called several witnesses who testified that he frequently carried large sums of money on his person.

Other facts will be stated during the discussion of the many interesting questions advanced by counsel in brief and in argument.

He first contends that the 1935 robbery conviction was void and could not be used for enhancement because the sentence in said cause assessed his punishment at 'a term of years not to exceed the maximum term as fixed by statute for the crime whereof he stands convicted.'

In connection with this and appellant's next contention, we quote from his own testimony on direct examination:

'Q. Mr. Shannon, I'll ask you if yor are the Charles Shannon that on the 20th day of May, A.D. 1935, was duly and legally convicted of the offense of robbery in the Criminal Court of Cook County, Illinois, in Cause No. 75746, on the docket of said court styled The State of Illinois vs. Charles Henry Shannon. A. I am the same person.

'Q. Is said conviction final? A. Yes.

'Q. Are you the same Charles Henry Shannon that was convicted of the offense of larceny on the 6th day of Arpil, A.D. 1942, in the Criminal Court of Cook County, Illinois, in Cause No. 42527? A. I am the same person.

* * *

* * *

'Q. When did you last get out of prison, sir? A. July 16, 1948.'

In view of appellant's testimony, it was not necessary that the State make any further proof of his prior conviction for robbery in 1935. The documents the State offered did not establish that an indefinite punishment was assessed, but only that appellant was sentenced to an indefinite term similar to the indeterminate sentence provided by the laws of Texas.

Reliance is had upon Villarreal v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 317 S.W.2d 531, and Morris v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 648, 280 S.W.2d 255. Villarreal was an appeal from a judgment assessing accused's punishment at 'not more than two years,' which we held to be indefinite and uncertain. Morris was an appeal from a driving while intoxicated, second-offender conviction in which we held that the information charging the prior conviction alleged for enhancement would not support a valid judgment because it stated no offense. Neither case is here controlling. We here have a final conviction which appellant has served and which for all this record shows is a proper judgment under the laws of Illinois.

He further contends that the 1942 conviction was not available for enhancement purposes because the indictment in such case charged appellant with the offense of robbery while the judgment found him guilty of 'Larceny Value of property $60.00 * * *'

In Massey v. State, 160 Tex.Cr.R. 49, 266 S.W.2d 880, 884, we quoted from 24 C.J.S. Criminal Law Sec. 1960, p. 1152, as follows: 'It is not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • State v. Bartee
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 30 Diciembre 1994
    ...ownership. See 52A C.J.S. Larceny § 2a. at 407 (1968). Theft and larceny are substantially the same offense. Shannon v. State, 170 Tex.Crim. 91, 338 S.W.2d 462, 465 (1960), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 935, 81 S.Ct. 386, 5 L.Ed.2d 369 The criminal mischief statute in effect at the time of the all......
  • Nielson v. State, 41781
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 29 Enero 1969
    ...397 S.W.2d 229; Nichols v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 386 S.W.2d 795; Jefferson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 364 S.W.2d 227; Shannon v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 91, 338 S.W.2d 462; See also 16 Tex.Jur.2d., Criminal Law, Sec. 24, p. As we view it, a conviction or acquittal for rape will bar a subsequent pros......
  • Jones v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 23 Junio 1971
    ...258, 339 S.W.2d 209; Ferrell v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 397 S.W.2d 86; Ex parte Romines, Tex.Cr.App., 419 S.W.2d 358; Shannon v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 91, 338 S.W.2d 462, cert. den., 364 U.S. 935, 81 S.Ct. 386, 5 L.Ed.2d 369; Dickey v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 576, 336 S.W.2d 165; theft from person ......
  • Cherry v. State, 42269
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 29 Octubre 1969
    ...485. The offense of robbery is but an aggravated form of theft. Dickey v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 576, 336 S.W.2d 165; Shannon v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 91, 338 S.W.2d 462, cert. den. 364 U.S. 935, 81 S.Ct. 386, 5 L.Ed.2d In Dickey v. State, supra, it was held that the felony offense of theft by......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT