Case ID: tex-crim_101/html/0120-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LATTIMORE, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

D. W. Wilford v. The State.
    No. 9445.
    Delivered June 17, 1925.
    Theft, a Misdemeanor — Evidence Held Sufficient.
    There being no bills of exception in this record, and the facts being amply sufficient to support the verdict, the judgment is affirmed.
    Appeal from the County Court of Grayson County. Tried below before the Hon. R. M. Carter, Judge.
    Appeal from a conviction of theft of chickens; penalty, one year in the county jail.
    The opinion states the case.
    
      R. M. Carter, for appellant.
    
      Tom Garrard, State’s Attorney, and Grover C. Morris, Assistant State’s Attorney, for the State. '
   LATTIMORE, Judge.

From conviction in county court of Gray-son County of misdemeanor theft, with punishment fixed at one year in the county jail, this appeal is taken.

Appellant is charged with theft of chickens. An accomplice testified fully to the fact that he in company with appellant went into the hen house of Mr. Sheppard and took therefrom a number of Rhode Island Red hens. Another accomplice testified that the following morning he went with appellant to the business house of W. H. Lucas in Sherman to whom they sold said Rhode Island Red hens. They divided the money, Mr. Sheppard, the alleged owner of the stolen chickens, testified to their loss on the night of January 25, 1925, and that he found some chickens in the possession of Mr. Lucas, one of which he positively identified as being one of those stolen at the time, by means of peculiar markings. Mr. Lucas testified that on the 26th of January he bought a number of Rhode Island Red hens from the defendant and the accomplice above referred to, paying the money to the defendant. He further testified that Mr. Sheppard came to his place later and identified, as his, one of the hens he had bought from appellant. We deem the evidence sufficient. There are no bills of exception in the record.

The judgment will be affirmed.