Williams v. State
| Decision Date | 10 December 1887 |
| Citation | 6 S.W. 318 |
| Parties | WILLIAMS v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Lamar county; D. H. SCOTT, Judge.
Indictment for the larceny of a pistol of the value of $20. Trial, verdict guilty, and defendant sentenced to a term of two years in the penitentiary. Defendant appealed.
No appearance for appellant. Asst. Atty. Gen. Davidson, for the State.
For the purpose of establishing identity in developing the res gestæ, or to prove guilt by circumstances connected with the theft, or to show the intent with which the accused acted with respect to the property for which he is on trial, it is competent for the state to prove the theft of other property at the same time and place of the theft of the property in question. Willson, Tex. Crim. Laws, § 1295. But the evidence of distinct thefts, committed at other times and places than the theft in question, is not relevant, and is inadmissible. Such evidence does not serve legitimately to throw any light upon the particular theft for which the defendant is on trial. Gilbraith v. State, 41 Tex. 567; Ivey v. State, 43 Tex. 425; Kelley v. State, 18 Tex. App. 262; Alexander v. State, 21 Tex. App. 406, 5 S. W. Rep. 840.
In this case, evidence tending to prove other distinct thefts than the one for which defendant was on trial had been committed by him, at different times and places, was admitted, over his objections. This was material error, well calculated to injure the defendant; and because of such error the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miller v. State
...18 Tex. App. 262; Bryan v. State, 49 Tex. Cr. R. 200, 91 S. W. 581; Nixon v. State, 31 Tex. Cr. R. 209, 20 S. W. 364; Williams v. State, 24 Tex. App. 412, 6 S. W. 318; Ivey v. State, 43 Tex. 425; Grant v. State, 42 Tex. Cr. R. 274, 58 S. W. 1026; Wilson v. State, 41 Tex. Cr. R. 118, 51 S. W......
-
Lawrence v. State
...regardless of whether it established an extraneous offense or not, such testimony should not be admitted." See, also, Williams v. State, 24 Tex. Cr. R. 412, 6 S. W. 318; Hill v. State, 44 Tex. Cr. R. 603, 73 S. W. 9; Lancaster v. State, 82 Tex. Cr. R. 473, 200 S. W. 167, 3 A. L. R. 1533; Nu......
-
Bowman v. State
...18 Tex. App. 262; Bryan v. State, 49 Tex. Cr. R. 200, 91 S. W. 581; Nixon v. State, 31 Tex. Cr. R. 209, 20 S. W. 364; Williams v. State, 24 Tex. App. 412, 6 S. W. 318; Ivey v. State, 43 Tex. 425; Grant v. State, 42 Tex. Cr. R. 274, 58 S. W. 1026; Wilson v. State, 41 Tex. Cr. R. 118, 51 S. W......
-
Perez v. State
...other thefts were contemporaneous with the theft for which the accused is on trial. 41-A Tex.Jur., par. 228, pp. 219-222; Williams v. State, 24 Tex.App. 412, 6 S.W. 318; Beach v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 11 S.W. 832; Musgrave v. State, 28 Tex.App. 57, 11 S.W. 927; Welhausen v. [165 TEXCRIM 641] ......