Case ID: sw_281/html/1053-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LATTIMORB, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

COOK v. STATE.
    (No. 10039.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    March 24, 1926.)
    1. Criminal law <©=>394 — 'Testimony of state’s witness that gunny sack dropped by defendant contained whisky, and that he picked it up held not obtained in violation of law.
    State’s witness’ testimony that contents of gunny sack was whisky, and that he picked it up in road where defendant dropped it, held not unlawfully obtained.
    2. Intoxicating liquors <&wkey;>236(7).
    Evidence held to sustain conviction of possessing intoxicating liquor for sale.
    Appeal from District Court, Camp County; R. T. Wilkinson, Judge.
    Bill Cook was convicted of possessing intoxicating liquor for purposes of sale, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Porter & Porter, of Greenville, and C. Everett Bryson and J. A. Guest, both of Pitts-burg; for appellant.
    Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., of Austin, and Robt. M. Lyles, Asst. State’s Atty., of Groesbeck, for the State.
   LATTIMORB, J.

Conviction in district court of Camp county of possessing intoxicating liquor for purposes of sale; punishment, one year in the penitentiary.

The record presents two bills ,of exception, each complaining of the refusal of the court to instruct the jury not to consider testimony, claimed to have been obtained in violation of the law. We are not in accord with the contention of appellant in either instance. According to the testimony, it is shown without contradiction that appellant, riding in a stripped-down Ford car, approached the place where the state witness was. Upon being ordered to halt, appellant jumped out of the car, having a gunny sack in his hand with two gallons of whisky in same. Appellant ran away leaving the whisky in the road. It was picked up by the state witness, who testified that the contents of the sack was whisky, and that he picked it up in the road where appellant dropped it. We perceive nothing in this testimony even remotely suggesting that it was obtained in violation of law. The proposition seems too plain to need citation of the statute or discussion of its . application.

The evidence amply sustaining the verdict, the judgment is affirmed. 
      <§3»For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes