Case ID: tex-ct-app_26/html/0482-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Willson, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 3034.
    W. D. Crane v. The State.
    Misapplication oe County or City Funds.—Indictment to charge the misapplication of county or city funds, as that offense is defined by article 103 of the Penal Code, must allege the ownership of the funds in the county, city or town, as the case may be. This indictment failing to allege the ownership of the funds, is insufficient to charge the offense, wherefore the prosecution is dismissed.
    Appeal from the District Court of Coleman. Tried below before the Hon. J. C. Randolph.
    The appellant in this case, who was a deputy sheriff and deputy collector of Coleman county, was convicted for the misapplication of one hundred and fifty-five dollars and thirty-nine cents, alleged to have come into his possession by virtue of said office. The penalty assessed by the verdict was a term of two years in the penitentiary.
    No brief for the appellant has reached the Reporters.
    
      W. L. Davidson, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
   Willson, Judge.

This prosecution is under article 103 of the Penal Code. It is not alleged in the indictment that the money converted was owned by any county, city or town. It is as essential, in an indictment for this offense, to allege the ownership of the money or property converted, as it is in the case of theft or embezzlement, and it must be money owned by a county, city or town in order to constitute this offense. The Assistant Attorney General concedes the insufficiency of the indictment. The judgment is reversed and the prosecution is dismissed.

Opinion delivered November 24, 1888.

Reversed and dismissed.