Sikes v. State

Citation166 Tex.Crim. 257,312 S.W.2d 524
Decision Date02 April 1958
Docket NumberNo. 29654,29654
PartiesM. J. SIKES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Dick Young, Houston, for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

DICE, Commissioner.

The conviction is for Burglary of a private residence at night; the punishment, five years.

The State's testimony shows that the prosecuting witness, L. A. Voglesang, and his wife, both of whom were aged, resided in their residence in the City of Rosenberg. On the night in question, after they had retired, Mrs. Voglesang was awakened around midnight by the sound of breaking glass in the front of the house. She then awakened her husband and after securing a pistol and placing it in his hand, heard someone raise a window in the back and enter the house. Mrs. Voglesang then left the house to secure help. Thereafter, upon seeing a man coming toward him, Mr. Voglesang fired one shot with the pistol and engaged the man in a struggle. As the two were struggling on the floor Assistant Chief of Police Ray Owens arrived at the residence and took the man, whom he identified as the appellant, in custody as he was attempting to flee.

As a witness in his own behalf appellant admitted that he entered the residence on the night in question by raising the window but denied that he had any intention to steal. He stated that he had been drinking, that he was intoxicated, and that he was going to see a girl and had entered the wrong house.

Appellant questions the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction on two grounds.

First, he insists that there is a fatal variance between the allegation and the proof as to the name of the person whose private residence it was charged he burglarized. Appellant insists that the name of the owner of the residence was alleged in the indictment as 'L. A. Vogelsang' and that the witness testified upon the trial that his name was 'L. A. Vogelsand'. An examination of the record does not reflect that the injured party so testified but did testify that his name was 'L. A. Voglesang'. The names 'Vogelsang' and 'Voglesang' are idem sonans and the difference in spelling was immaterial.

Appellant next insists that the evidence was insufficient because there was no proof that he entered the residence with the intent to commit the crime of theft as was charged in the indictment.

The very act of breaking and entering a house in the nighttime raises the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • United States v. Melton
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • September 26, 1973
    ...864 (1963); Behel v. State, 40 Ala.App. 689, 122 So.2d 537 (1960); Garrett v. State, 350 P.2d 983 (Okl.Cr.1960); Sikes v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 257, 312 S.W.2d 524 (1958); State v. Tellay, 7 Utah 2d 308, 324 P.2d 490 (1958); State v. Gatewood, 169 Kan. 679, 221 P.2d 392 (1950); State v. Wood......
  • Flanagan v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • June 10, 1981
    ...653 (1930) ("Holland" and "Hollins"); Raseley v. State, 470 S.W.2d 899 (Tex.Cr.App.1971) ("Raseley" and "Roseley"); Sikes v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 257, 312 S.W.2d 524 (1958) ("Vogelsang" and "Voglesang"); Martin v. State, 541 S.W.2d 605 (Tex.Cr.App.1976) ("Dianna" and Where the name of the i......
  • Rodgers v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • April 6, 1983
    ...653 (1930) ("Holland" and "Hollins"); Raseley v. State, 470 S.W.2d 899 (Tex.Cr.App.1971) ("Raseley" and "Roseley"); Sikes v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 257, 312 S.W.2d 524 (1958) ("Vogelsang" and "Voglesang"); Martin v. State, 541 S.W.2d 605 (Tex.Cr.App.1976) ("Dianna" and "Dina"). [some citation......
  • Warren v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • July 27, 1982
    ...e.g. Callahan v. State, 502 S.W.2d 3 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Hutchinson v. State, 481 S.W.2d 881 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Sikes v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 157, 257, 312 S.W.2d 524 (1958); Martin v. State, 148 Tex.Cr.R. 232, 186 S.W.2d 80 (1945), it has never been extended to cases where the breaking and ......
  • 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