Case Name: HANEY v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1931-02-25
Citations: 37 S.W.2d 746
Docket Number: No. 14006
Parties: HANEY v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 37
Pages: 746–747

Head Matter:
HANEY v. STATE.
No. 14006.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Feb. 25, 1931.
State’s Rehearing Granted April 1, 1931.
Will S. Payne, of Fort Worth, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
CHRISTIAN, J.
The offense is theft of cattle; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.
The indictment alleges that appellant "did then and there unlawfully take one head of cattle," etc., omitting the word "fraudulently." The use of the word "fraudulently" is indispensable in charging theft under our statute. Byrd v. State, 89 Tex. Cr. R. 371, 231 S. W. 399; Prim v. State, 32 Tex. 158; Conner v. State, 6 Tex. App. 455; Young v. State, 12 Tex. App. 614; Muldrew v. State, 12 Tex. App. 617; Sloan v. State, 18 Tex. App. 225; Ortis v. State, 18 Tex. App. 282; Ware v. State, 19 Tex. App. 13; Chance v. State, 27 Tex. App. 441, 11 S. W. 457; Doxey v. State (Tex. Sup.) 12 S. W. 412; Watt v. State, 61 Tex. Cr. R. 662, 136 S. W. 56; Baldwin v. State, 76 Tex. Cr. R. 499, 175 S. W. 701; Newman v. State, 113 Tex. Cr. R. 517, 23 S.W.(2d) 367. In Byrd v. State, supra, it was held that an allegation that the appellant "did unlawfully take, steal and carry away" was not equivalent to an averment' that he "did then and there fraudulently take," etc.
The judgment is reversed, and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
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. .