Gowans v. State

<p>1. —Theft—Confessions—Arrest—Res Gestae.</p> <p>Where, upon trial of theft, the evidence showed that the defendant was seen to take the property, and was followed by an officer for about a hundred yards and arrested, and found with the property, confessing that he had taken the same, the same was admissible as res gestae. Following Bronson v. State, 59 Texas Crim. Rep., 17, and other cases.</p> <p>2. —Same—Brief—Bill of Exceptions.</p> <p>Objections presented in the brief, but not stated in the bill of exceptions, can not be considered on appeal.</p> <p>3. —Same—Charge of Court—Circumstantial Evidence.</p> <p>Where, upon trial of theft, the evidence was positive and direct, there was no error in the court’s failure to charge on circumstantial evidence. Following Barnes v. State, 53 Texas Crim. Rep., 629, and other cases.</p> <p>4. —Same—Charge of Court—Other Offenses—Article 723.</p> <p>Where, in a misdemeanor case, the court charged as to other offenses, and no special charge was requested, there was no error, and article 723, Code Crim. Proc. does not change this rule.</p> <p>5. —Same—Argument of Counsel—Harmless Error.</p> <p>Where, upon trial of misdemeanor theft, it was brought out by the defense that other .cases of a similar character were pending against the defendant, and the State’s counsel in his argument stated that he might dismiss these other cases, hut did not know what he would do, etc., while improper, was harmless error, as defendant’s guilt was fully established, and he was not given the maximum punishment. Following Young v. State, 31 Texas Crim. Rep., 24, and other cases. Davidson,. Presiding Judge, dissenting.</p>