Case ID: sw2d_112/html/0732-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MORROW, Presiding Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BLAKE v. STATE.
    No. 19280.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Jan. 12, 1938.
    A. C. Linne and T. E. Mosheim, both of Seguin, for appellant.
    Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.
   MORROW, Presiding Judge.

The conviction is for burglary; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary ’ for a period of six years.

The State’s witness, Alfred Koebig, conducted a general mercantile business at San Gerónimo and was also the postmaster of that town. On the night of March 12, 1937, his store was burglarized and certain articles taken therefrom. Among the stolen articles were clothes, flashlights, cigars, cigarettes, and neckties. Some of the stolen articles were recovered from the appellant and identified by the witness mentioned.

At the time of his arrest the appellant was in possession of a suitcase containing some of the articles which were identified by Koebig as having been taken from his store.

The appellant did not testify upon the trial, nor did he offer any witnesses in his behalf. The State’s case is therefore made to depend upon the unexplained possession of recently stolen property. Such' evidence has oftentimes been held sufficient to sustain a conviction. See article 1410,. Vernon’s Ann.Tex.P.C., vol. 3, p. 147, note 34. See, also, Odom v. State, 116 Tex.Cr.R. 622, 32 S.W.2d 1106; Davidson v. State, 125 Tex.Cr.R. 518, 69 S.W.2d 97; White v. State, 127 Tex.Cr.R. 497, 77 S.W.2d 226.

The bills of exception found in the-transcript are in question and answer form. In the absence of the certificate of the trial judge authorizing the bills to-be drawn in such manner, this court is precluded from considering the same. See Page v. State, 115 Tex.Cr.R. 605, 27 S.W.2d 219; Roper v. State, 116 Tex.Cr.R. 555, 31 S.W.2d 438; , Winfrey v. State,. 122 Tex.Cr.R. 480, 55 S.W.2d 1046. See,, also, article 760, C.C.P.1925, as amended,. Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. art. 760.

Finding no error authorizing a reversal, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.