Ward v. State

Decision Date05 November 1969
Docket NumberNo. 42297,42297
Citation446 S.W.2d 304
PartiesJames WARD, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Stephen A. Wakefield, Houston, for appellant.

Carol C. Vance, Dist. Atty., Houston, James C. Brough and Vic Percorino, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Jim Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.



The conviction is for felony theft of an automobile with a prior conviction for the same offense alleged for enhancement; the punishment, ten years.

It is contended that the evidence is insufficient to show that the automobile stolen from Jack D. Owen was the same automobile in which the officers found the appellant sitting twenty-two days later.

Jack D. Owen testified that he was the owner of a 1966 Chevrolet automobile, license No. PDR 13, which he parked near his office about 9:30 a.m., on December 13, 1967, and which was missing about 1 p.m., that day; and that he did not give the appellant or anyone his consent to take the car.

Officer McKeehan testified that while on routine patrol on January 4, 1968, he and his companion saw the appellant sitting on the driver's side of a "66 Chevrolet with a '67 Texas license plate' PDR 13, which was parked in front of the 500 Club and after checking their 'rap sheet' they found that it was listed among the cars stolen during the previous thirty days. As they kept the appellant continuously under surveillance while they were turning around, they saw the appellant, who was alone in the car, move from the driver's side to the passenger side of the Chevrolet.

While testifying, the appellant stated that as he was walking along the street on January 4, 1968, a man, who said his name was Paul Wiggins, picked him up in a car and after travelling four or five blocks Wiggins said he had to stop at the 500 Club for a few minutes, and he (the appellant) remained seated on the passenger side of the car while Wiggins entered the club. The appellant also testified that he was the same person who had been previously convicted for felony theft of an automobile on January 9, 1967, which corresponded with the conviction alleged for enhancement. Further, record proof of the alleged prior conviction is contained in the record.

Officer McKeehan, recalled by the state on rebuttal, testified that he first observed the appellant in the car about 6 p.m. The appellant told them that Paul Wiggins was the driver of the car and was then inside of the 500 Club. With the appellant they entered the club and asked appellant to point out Wiggins, but he was unable to do so. They checked the club including the rest rooms and did not find any unlocked rear door or exit except the front door through which anyone could leave the building, and then they talked to the seven or eight persons and the proprietor who were in the building. None of them had seen or knew anything about Paul Wiggins.

The court charged the jury upon the law applicable to circumstantial evidence.

The description of the automobile as shown by the testimony of the witnesses Owen and McKeehan and the following testimony of the appellant:

'Q Now, you heard the testimony of Mr. Owen and Officer McKeehan. Do you remember the 4th day of January, 1968, when you were arrested by Officer McKeehan?

'A Yes, I do.

'Q Were you in that vehicle, James, at that time?

'A Yes, sir, I was.'

is sufficient to warrant the finding that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Wood v. State, 67486
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 3, 1982
    ...of the value of over $50.00" was sufficient to apprise that defendant of the nature of the charge against him. See also Ward v. State, 446 S.W.2d 304 (Tex.Cr.App.1969); Davis v. State, 130 Tex.Cr.R. 252, 93 S.W.2d 729 (1936); Snyder v. State, 118 Tex.Cr.R. 652, 39 S.W.2d 885 As to appellant......
  • Bosworth v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 13, 1974
    ...Theft, Section 110. The indictment alleged the theft of 'one (1) automobile.' Such description was held sufficient in Ward v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 446 S.W.2d 304. No error is Appellant contends that the allegation in the indictment that the value of the automobile taken is 'over the value of......
  • Bullock v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • October 20, 2015
    ...(Tex.Crim.App.1974) ( "Contrary to common law, it was not necessary that the automobile be moved or carried away."); Ward v. State, 446 S.W.2d 304, 306 (Tex.Crim.App.1969) (conviction based on evidence including "[t]he presence of the appellant behind the steering wheel while alone in the c......
  • Turner v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • October 18, 1972
    ...of the testimony. Tinsley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 461 S.W.2d 605; Larkin v. State, 157 Tex.Cr.R. 284, 248 S.W.2d 134; Ward v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 446 S.W.2d 304. In Thomas v. State, 85 Tex.Cr.R. 246, 211 S.W. 453, it was said, 'We think where the alleged owner was permitted, without objectio......
  • 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