Snider v. State
| Decision Date | 16 December 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 14592.,14592. |
| Parties | SNIDER v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from Throckmorton County Court; Ewell Condron, Judge.
Alivis Snider was convicted for receiving and concealing stolen property, and he appeals.
Reversed.
B. F. Reynolds and Jeff A. Fowler, both of Throckmorton, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
Conviction for receiving and concealing stolen property of the value of less than five dollars; punishment, a fine of fifty dollars.
The complaint and information contained two counts; one charging theft, and the other the receiving and concealing of the same property, knowing it to have been stolen. Both counts were submitted to the jury in the charge of the court. This may have been unfortunate. The testimony makes out a clear case of theft, in which event the accused could not be convicted for receiving and concealing. The two offenses are separate and distinct offenses in law. McAfee v. State, 14 Tex. App. 668. Many other authorities announce the same conclusion. The state relies for conviction upon appellant's written confession. In same, he describes a trip made by himself and two others to the place where the motor meter, involved in the instant prosecution, was stolen, and also a wheel, tire, and tube were stolen from an automobile, and certain harness. There is no question but that appellant was present and participating as a principal offender at the time of each theft. The parties went to the high school building in appellant's car, and, as he states in his confession, while there Howard Mays stole the motor meter off a car; the taking being known to appellant. The parties left the school building together and went to New Castle, Tex., where they separated, appellant keeping the automobile wheel, the tire, and the motor meter, and the others taking the harness. We quote from appellant's confession: In another place in the confession appellant said that the tire, motor meter, etc., found at his home by the officers "is the same property that I helped steal in Woodson, Texas, last Thursday night." It thus appearing without dispute that appellant participated in the stealing of the motor meter in question, under all our...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ogle v. State, 6 Div. 163
...Metcalf v. State, 98 Fla. 457, 124 So. 427 (1929), and Reg. v. Hilton, Bell C.C. 20, 169 Eng.Rep. 1150 (1858), with Snider v. State, 119 Tex.Cr.R. 635, 44 S.W.2d 997 (1931), and Reg. v. Perkins, 2 Den.C.C. 459, 169 Eng.Rep. 582 (1852). "Alabama follows the rule that: " '. . . (W)here one st......
-
Dennis v. State
...The offenses of theft and theft by receiving stolen property are and have always been two separate offenses. Snider v. State, 119 Tex.Cr.R. 635, 44 S.W.2d 997 (Tex.Cr.App.1931); Warren v. State, 514 S.W.2d 458 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Ex parte Cannon, supra; Reynolds v. State, supra. The gist of ......
-
White v. State
...Metcalf v. State, 98 Fla. 457, 124 So. 427 (1929), and Reg. v. Hilton, Bell C.C. 20, 169 Eng.Rep. 1150 (1858), with Snider v. State, 119 Tex.Cr.R. 635, 44 S.W.2d 997 (1931), and Reg. v. Perkins, 2 Den.C.C. 459, 169 Eng.Rep. 582 (1852). Alabama follows the rule that: " '. . . where one steal......
-
Thornton v. State, 20304.
...133, 210 S.W. 805; Kolb v. State, 88 Tex.Cr.R. 593, 228 S.W. 210; Walker v. State, 94 Tex.Cr.R. 568, 252 S.W. 552; Snider v. State, 119 Tex.Cr.R. 635, 44 S.W.2d 997; Byrd v. State, 117 Tex.Cr.R. 489, 38 S.W.2d 332; McInnis v. State, 122 Tex.Cr.R. 128, 54 S.W.2d 96, Coy v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.......