Case Name: WATSON v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1928-05-16
Citations: 7 S.W.2d 586
Docket Number: No. 11759
Parties: WATSON v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 7
Pages: 586–588

Head Matter:
WATSON v. STATE.
(No. 11759.)
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
May 16, 1928.
Rehearing Denied June 20, 1928.
Dial & Brim, of Sulphur Springs, for appellant.
A. A. Dawson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
CHRISTIAN, J.
The offense is possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.
Operating under a search warrant, officers searched appellant's residence and found therein two gallons of whisky. Testifying in his own behalf, appellant admitted the possession and ownership of the whisky, but declared that he was in bad physical condition and used it for medicinal purposes.
It is unnecessary to determine whether the search warrant was legally sufficient. Appellant testified that the whisky belonged to him. Having testified to the same facts as stated by the officers relative to the quantity of whisky he possessed, appellant cannot now claim to have been injured by the testimony of the officers, even if such testimony was improperly admitted. Frey v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 3 S.W.(2d) 459; McLaughlin v. State, 4 S.W.(2d) 54, opinion No. 11286, de livered February 15, 1928; Sifuentes et al. v. State, 5 S.W.(2d) 144, opinion No. 11546, delivered March 7, 1928; Gonzales v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 299 S. W. 901; Wagner v. State, 53 Tex. Cr. R. 306, 109 S. W. 169.
The judgment is affirmed.
PER CURIAM. The foregoing opinion 'of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.