Case ID: sw2d_242/html/0420-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BEAUCHAMP, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SUTTON v. STATE.
    No. 25366.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Oct. 3, 1951.
    No attorney for appellant.
    George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.
   BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was charged with receiving and concealing stolen property of the value in excess of $5 and less than $50 and was assessed a penalty of thirty days in jail.

The State’s Attorney, in his brief, admits doubt as to the sufficiency of the evidence to support conviction. We think it is definitely insufficient: The state relies upon the evidence of an accomplice witness and no effort was made to corroborate the same. We find in the record reference to a statement being signed by appellant but it is not included in the statement of facts and there is nothing to show its contents. Other defects in- the record need not be discussed.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause is remanded.