Case Name: UTSLER v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1923-03-14
Citations: 250 S.W. 172
Docket Number: No. 7610
Parties: UTSLER v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 250
Pages: 172–173

Head Matter:
UTSLER v. STATE.
(No. 7610.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
March 14, 1923.
Rehearing Denied April 25, 1923.)
1. Burglary <§=542(1) — Defendant’s unexplained possession of stolen property shortly after theft held to identify him as the criminal.
In a prosecution for burglary, evidence, that the stolen property was found in defendant’s possession a very short time after the offense was committed, and that defendant failed to explain his possession thereof, ¡held sufficient to. identify defendant as the person who committed the crime.
2. Burglary <§=345 — Truth of defendant’s testimony in explanation of possession of recently stolen property held for jury.
In a prosecution for burglary, the truth of defendant’s testimony in' explanation of his possession of the stolen property shortly after the commission of the crime was a question of fact for the jury.
3. Criminal law <§=3.1159(5) —Jury’s finding conclusive on appeal.
The jury’s finding as to defendant’s defensive theory is binding on the Court of Criminal Appeals.
Appeal from Criminal District Court, No. 2;Dallas County; C. A. Pippen, Judge.
Willie Utsler was convicted of burglary, and be appeals.
Affirmed.
Will S. Payne, of Dallas, for appellant.
R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, J.
Appellant was convicted in criminal district court No. 2 of Dallas county of the offense of burglary, and his punishment' fixed at two years in the penitentiary.
The record presents no bills of exception. The statement of facts shows without dispute the burglary of the house alleged in the indictment', the finding in appellant's possession shortly thereafter of property taken from the alleged burglarized hous.e, and appellant's confession that he was implicated in the burglary. The indictment is in regular form, and the charge of the court correctly presents the law.
No error appearing, an affirmance is ordered.
<®=>]?or other eases see same topic' and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes'