Court Opinion

ID: 9661399
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 22:38:09.396646+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:28.211783
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARIHG
MORRISON, Judge.
*83Appellant’s able attorney has taken us to task for not citing any cases in our original opinion and has requested that we distinguish his case from several cases which he cites. We shall briefly review the salient facts before us. A burglary occurred, and a 600-pound safe was removed; shortly thereafter appellant and his companions were seen in a secluded spot near the safe, which had been broken open, and they all fled. Appellant failed to make any explanation of the predicament in which he was found.
With this in mind, we refer to appellant’s cases.
In Russell v. State, 86 Texas Cr. Rep. 609, 218 S.W. 1049, there was no showing of flight. There was evidence tending to establish an alibi at the time of the burglary.
In Russell v. State, 86 Texas Cr. Rep. 580, 218 S.W. 1051, the possession was not recent, and there was no showing of flight.
In Hilson v. State, 101 Texas Cr. Rep. 449, 276 S.W. 272, there was evidence of flight, but there was an entire absence of any showing as to what happened to the fruits of the robbery. The accused was not shown to have been connected therewith in any way.
In Gillman v. State, 119 Texas Cr. Rep. 66, 46 S.W. 2d 699, there was not showing of flight.
We have carefully reviewed appellant’s motion and remain convinced that this cause was properly decided originally.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.