TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

McNeil v. State

Paul McNeil v. the State

McNeil v. State, 91 S.W.2d 652 (Tex. Crim. App. 1936)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 26, 1936
Docket
No. 17961.
Judges
Christian
Citations
91 S.W.2d 652129 Tex. Crim. 652
Summary
The opinion states the case.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Christian

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is robbery; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for ten years.

The State’s testimony was to the effect that appellant and another man exhibited pistols and took from the possession of Mrs. J. W. Gosnell, sixty-three dollars in money. Mrs. Gosnell was acquainted with appellant. She positively identified him as one of the men who participated in the robbery. Other witnesses testified to the effect that the robbery was perpetrated. Appellant did not testify and introduced no witnesses.

In reply to a question by counsel for the State, one of the witnesses said: “Well, a robbery was perpetrated,” Appellant’s *653 objection on the ground that the statement of the witness was a conclusion was overruled. It was uncontroverted that two men robbed Mrs. Gosnell. The witness who made the statement we have quoted did not undertake to testify that appellant perpetrated the robbery. However, Mrs. Gosnell positively identified appellant. Under the circumstances, if it should be conceded that appellant’s objection should have been sustained, the matter presents harmless error.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1937: 11938: 11942: 11948: 11952: 11955: 11956: 11958: 219372026peak 1958 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. King v. Rieth108 S.W.2d 1 (Mo. 1937)
  2. Summers v. Tavern Rock Sand Company315 S.W.2d 201 (Mo. 1958)
  3. Dennis v. Wood211 S.W.2d 470 (Mo. 1948)
  4. Stout v. St. Louis County Transit Company285 S.W.2d 1 (Mo. Ct. App. 1955)
  5. Caffey v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company292 S.W.2d 611 (Mo. Ct. App. 1956)
  6. Baker v. Norris248 S.W.2d 870 (Mo. Ct. App. 1952)

Most recent

  1. Summers v. Tavern Rock Sand Company315 S.W.2d 201 (Mo. 1958)
  2. Davidson v. King309 S.W.2d 132 (Mo. Ct. App. 1958)
  3. Caffey v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company292 S.W.2d 611 (Mo. Ct. App. 1956)
  4. Stout v. St. Louis County Transit Company285 S.W.2d 1 (Mo. Ct. App. 1955)
  5. Baker v. Norris248 S.W.2d 870 (Mo. Ct. App. 1952)
  6. Dennis v. Wood211 S.W.2d 470 (Mo. 1948)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list