Court Opinion

ID: 9682931
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 13:19:51.54172+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:43.270729
License: Public Domain

DOUGLAS, Judge,
dissenting.
The majority reverses and dismisses the prosecution “in the interest of justice” because the indictment did not allege that appellant intentionally, knowingly, reckless*379ly or negligently possessed a firearm. The indictment, in part, alleges that appellant
“did possess a firearm, namely a pistol, away from the premises where he lived, and that the said Harold B. Tew had been previously and finally convicted of Burglary, an act of violence against property, in Cause No. 18,909 in the 169th District Court of Bell County, Texas, on December 3, 1971.”
It is difficult how someone could possess a pistol away from his premises where he lived without knowingly doing so. The definition of possession in V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Section 1.07(28), “means actual care, custody, control or management.” Taking this definition, it is hard to conceive any case where one can have the actual care, custody, control or management of property without knowing it. It is not suggested how there could be a reckless or negligent possession under the definition passed by the Legislature.
Appellant knew from the indictment what he was charged with. He did not complain and has not complained as of this date. But, “in the interest of justice”, the majority finds that he could have care, custody, control and management of a firearm without knowing it.
The judgment should not be reversed.