Case Name: SMITH v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1923-04-25
Citations: 252 S.W. 562
Docket Number: No. 7115
Parties: SMITH v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 252
Pages: 562–563

Head Matter:
SMITH v. STATE.
(No. 7115.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
April 25, 1923.
Rehearing Denied June 20, 1923.)
1. Criminal law <&wkey;982 — Testimony as to good reputation of accused on application for suspended sentence properly excluded, where not relating to time of offense.
When an application for suspended sentence is made, and the reputation of the accused as a peaceable, law-abiding citizen made an issue, the test is his present reputation, and where the record shows that, prior to the theft of which defendant was convicted, he with other associates had committed a burglary, which fact was not denied, his reputation at the time of the commission of the theft was admittedly bad, and testimony as to his good reputation prior to his return from service in the army was properly excluded.
2. Criminal law <&wkey;982 — On. application for suspended sentence, evidence that accused was mentally weak and easily influenced by associates properly excluded.
The law of a suspended sentence being bottomed on the hope of reformation of the offender, evidence that accused was not of the highest order of mentality, and that he was a person easily influenced by his associates, was properly excluded on an application for suspended sentence.
Appeal from District Court, Gillegpie County; J. H. McLean, Judge.
Arthur Smith was convicted of theft* and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Alfred P. O. Petsch, of Fredericksburg, and W. O. Linden, of San Antonio, for appellant.
R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, J.
Appellant was convicted in the district court of Gillespie county of theft of property of the value of more than $50, and his punishment fixed at three years in the penitentiary.
Appellant was tried in February, 1922. Oomplaint is made of the fact that he was not allowed to show that his general reputation as a law-abiding citizen was good prior to his return from the army. This was offered as bearing upon his application for a suspended sentence, appellant having pleaded guilty to the offense charged. The testimony was offered from witness Townsend, and may be discussed in connection with further testimony offered from witness Fowler to the effect that appellant's general reputation as a law-abiding citizen was good prior to July, 1921, that being about the date of a burglary committed by appellant and some associates, which fact was not denied.
When an application for suspended sentence is presented, and the reputation of the accused as a peaceable, law-abiding citizen made an issue, the test is his present reputation. Wilson v. State, 83 Tex. Cr. R. 26, 201 S. W. 188; Wagley v. State, 87 Tex. Cr. R. 504, 224 S. W. 687. And as we understand the instant record, it was not denied that since the burglary above mentioned, some months prior to the theft charged in the instant case, appellant's reputation in this regard had been bad. This being true, we are of opinion that the contention now before us in regard to the admission of the above testimony is unsound. We do not wish to be understood as holding that, where the accused has moved from place to place, he may be denied the privilege' of proving his reputation by separate witnesses for each time and place of his habitation. Such practice would be permissible, but in a case like this, where no witness is offered to show good reputation at the time of trial, or up to the commission of the instant offense, and it is admitted that at such time Ms reputation is bad, it is not erroneous to reject testimony which seeks to carve out of the past life of the accused a certain period and prove good reputation therein. We are cited to no authority, and know of none, holding such course proper.
We do not believe the trial court was called upon to permit appellant to show that he was not of the highest order of mentality. Appellant offered testimony, the effect of which would have been to show him a person easily influenced by his associates. The law of a suspended sentence is bottomed on the hope of reformation of the offender, and certainly evidence whose tendency would be to show that the accused was one easily persuaded to crime by any criminal would not strengthen the belief on the part of the jury that to give him a suspended sentence would reform him.
Finding no error in the record, the judgment will be affirmed.
@s»For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numhered Digests and Indexes