Court Opinion

ID: 9766737
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 04:57:28.047705+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:25.420206
License: Public Domain

dissenting.
This is a theft case in which appellant challenges the jurisdiction of the felony trial court on the ground that the State failed to prove that the stolen copper tubing had a value of $750.00 or more. The majority opinion holds the following proof insufficient:
[PROSECUTOR]: All right. In regard to the copper tubing in that location, and the fashion that the copper tubing was in the ground, in the foundation, what was the approximate cost for the replacement of the copper tubing in the condition that it was in when it was removed from the house?
[PROJECT MANAGER]: It’s approximately $350 to $400 a house to have the copper put back in.
In the Texas Penal Code at section 31.08 we find the following definition of the word “value”:
(a)
[[Image here]]
(2) if the fair market value of the property cannot be ascertained, the cost of replacing the property within a reasonable time after the theft.
[[Image here]]
TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. sec. 31.08(a)(2) (Vernon 1974).
I strongly feel that the quoted testimony, together with other testimony that six houses were despoiled of copper tubing, is sufficient to meet the cited statute. Testimony by appellant as to the scrap value of the tubing goes only to the weight of the quoted value. The jury chose to accept the replacement cost.
I would affirm the conviction.
BURDOCK, J., joins in this opinion.