Case Name: J. C. Harrison v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1923-05-02
Citations: 95 Tex. Crim. 513
Docket Number: No. 7615
Parties: J. C. Harrison v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 95
Pages: 513–515

Head Matter:
J. C. Harrison v. The State.
No. 7615.
Decided May 2, 1923.
. Rehearing denied October 24, 1923.
1. —Transporting Intoxicating Liquor — Indictment.
It was not necessary to allege in the indictment that the transportation of the liquor was for the purpose of sale. Following Crowley v. State, 92 Texas Crim. Rep., 103, and other cases.
2. —Same—Evidence—Other Transactions.
Where, upon trial of transporting intoxicating liquor, the proof showed that part of the liquor found was white corn whisky and part red whisky, there was no error in admitting evidence that there was also found in appellant’s possession a bottle containing coloring material.
3. —Same—Argument of Counsel.
In view of the facts and the qualification by the trial judge to the bill of exceptions relative to argument of the district attorney, no error is presented.
4. —Same—Rehearing—Res Gestae.
This court is unable to conclude that testimony of the finding of certain coloring matter in possession of defendant was not part of the res gestae of the transaction.
5. —Same—Argument of Counsel — Suspended Sentence.
Where the argument of State’s counsel was in response to that of defendant’s counsel with reference to a comment on suspended sentence cases, there was no reversible error.
Appeal from the District Court of Cass. Tried below before the Honorable Hugh Carney.
Appeal from a conviction of transporting intoxicating liquor; penalty, one year imprisonment in the penitentiary.
The opinion states the case.
Bartlett & Patman for appellant.
On question of argument of counsel, Johnson v. State, 138 S. W. Rep., 1021; Beason v. State, 67 id., 96.
R. G. Storey, Assistant Attorney General, lor the State.

Opinion:
HAWKINS, Judge.
— Upon his plea of guilty to transportation of whisky appellant's punishment was assessed at one year in the penitentiary.
.It was not necessary to allege in the indictment that transportation of the liquor was for the purpose of sale. Crowley v. State, 92 Texas Crim. Rep., 103, 242 S. W. Rep., 572, Cecil v. State, 92 Texas Crim. Rep., 359, 243 S. W. Rep., 988; Copeland v. State, 92 Texas Crim. Rep., 554, 244 S. W. Rep., 818; McNeil v. State, 93 Texas Crim. Rep., 259, 247 S. W. Rep., 536.
At the time appellant was arrested he was found in possession of twenty-nine half-gallon fruit jars of whisky. He had broken some of the bottles or jars before the officers could overtake the automobile in which he was transporting it, but admitted to them at the time of the arrest that he had started with eighteen gallons. The State proved over objection that there was also found in appellant's possession along with the whisky a pint beer bottle about half full of coloring material such as is used for coloring white whisky red, the objection being that it tended to prove other offenses against accused, viz, either of selling whisky or of having it in possession for the purpose of sale, and that it was prejudicial to appellant in the jury's consideration of his plea for a suspended sentence. The objections are not tenable. The proof shows part of the liquor found was white corn whisky, and part red whisky. The presence of the coloring material was res gestae. The jury were properly put in possession of all the facts to enable them to fix the punishment and exercise their judgment in passing upon the issue of suspended sentence.
In view of the fact and the qualification of the trial judge to the bill of exceptions relative to argument of the district attorney no error is presented.
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.