Wilson v. State
| Decision Date | 08 November 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 33773,33773 |
| Citation | 356 S.W.2d 928,171 Tex.Crim. 391 |
| Parties | Randolph WILSON, Appellant. v. STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.
Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The offense is robbery with firearms; the punishment, 20 years.
In view of our disposition of this case, a recitation of the facts will not be deemed necessary.
The indictment is fundamentally defective in that nowhere therein is there a description of the property taken other than 'corporeal personal property.' Without a further description, the accused was not put on notice as to what he was alleged to have taken by force. Oakley v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 630, 323 S.W.2d 43, and the cases there cited, calls for reversal of the conviction and a dismissal of the prosecution under the present indictment. See also Holland v. State, 110 Tex.Cr.R. 384, 10 S.W.2d 561, and 33 Tex.Dig. k17(3).
It is so ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rodgers v. State
...said, 'Neither was it necessary for the indictment to allege denomination and kind of money.' Reliance is had upon Wilson v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 391, 356 S.W.2d 928, where this Court, speaking through this writer, said the term 'corporeal personal property' did not put the accused on notic......
-
Ex Parte Forgason, 56715
...of theft, and that a description of the property taken was essential to the validity of the indictment, relying upon Wilson v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 391, 356 S.W.2d 928 and Holland v. State, 110 Tex.Cr.R. 384, 10 S.W.2d 561. It was further held that the failure to give any description of the......
-
Ex parte Cannady, 56907
...taken renders the indictment fatally defective, and he relies on Mankin v. State, 451 S.W.2d 236 (Tex.Cr.App.1970) and Wilson v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 391, 356 S.W.2d 928. In Mankin this Court held that robbery is only an aggravated form of theft, and that a description of the property taken......
-
Byrd v. State, 43045
...that appellant took 'money, the same being the property of the said James Henry Garrett * * *.' Reliance is had upon Wilson v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 391, 356 S.W.2d 928. There, as in Mankin v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 451 S.W.2d 236, the property alleged to have been taken was merely described as......