Case ID: tex-crim_61/html/0232-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HARPER, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

G. W. Cunningham, alias Frank Bennett, v. The State.
    No. 949.
    Decided February 15, 1911.
    Theft from Person—Statement of Pacts—Practice on Appeal.
    In the absence of a statement of facts, if the charge is applicable to any state of facts that might be made by the testimony under the indictment, it will be assumed that the court properly submitted the whole law of the case.
    Appeal from the Criminal District Court of Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. Ed Sewell, Special Judge.
    Appeal from a conviction of theft from the person; penalty, seven years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    
      The opinion states the case.
    No brief on file for appellant.
    
      C. E. Lane, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
   HARPER, Judge.

—In this case the appellant was charged with the offense of theft from the person. He was tried, adjudged guilty, and his punishment assessed at seven years confinement in the penitentiary.

There is no statement of facts in the record. In the absence of a statement of facts, if the charge is applicable to any state of facts that might be made by the testimony under the allegations of the indictment, on appeal it will be considered and assumed that the trial court submitted to the jury all the law applicable to the case. Mundine v. State, 50 Texas Crim. Rep., 97; Wright v. State, 37 Texas Crim. Rep., 146.

The charge of the court presents the law as applicable to the offense charged in the indictment, and the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Affirmed.