Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

150 S.W. 906

Brown v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided November 6, 1912

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1912-11-06

<p>Criminal Law (§ 1159*) — Appeal—Review-Conflicting Evidence.</p> <p>A conviction of theft cannot be disturbed because of defendant’s testimony that he took the property with the owner’s consent, this being merely in conflict with evidence justifying the court’s finding.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 3074-3083; Dee. Dig. 1159.*]</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently July 1978

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1912-11-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DAVIDSON, P. J.

¶1Appellant was convicted of misdemeanor theft; his punishment being assessed at a fine of $10 and one day in the cofinty jail.

¶2The record is before us without bills of exception or a motion for new trial. The case was tried before the court without a jury, and an inspection of the facts, we think, justified the finding of the court. We are not apprised what appellant’s contentions are, except from his brief. He contends that the alleged stolen property was taken with the consent of the owner; but the owner testifies the other way. We deem it unnecessary to review the facts. The court was justified in his finding, and we would not be authorized to set it aside under the record.

¶3The judgment is affirmed.

/150/sw/906 · .json · Public domain