Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

324 S.W.2d 867

Pitcock v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1959-05-13

Relies on 168 Tex. Crim. 223 - Pitcock v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1959-05-13

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently January 1971

4 state decisions

20195919601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

WOODLEY, Judge.

¶1The offense is passing as true a forged instrument; the punishment, five years.

¶2This case was tried jointly with our cause No. 30,708, 324 S.W.2d 866, upon a plea of guilty before the court.

¶3The indictment alleged the passing of a forged draft for $45.32 to Joe Tilbury, signed Leon Morrison. This draft was payable to Foley’s.

¶4Joe Tilbury, employee of Foley’s, did not testify. The testimony of Special Agent Jones that the $45.32 draft was passed to Tilbury in payment for luggage he delivered was hearsay and without probative value. Pitcock v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 324 S.W.2d 866.

¶5The evidence is insufficient to sustain the allegation that the draft was passed to Joe Tilbury and to support the conviction.

¶6The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

/324/sw2d/867 · .json · Public domain