TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Smith v. State

L. W. Smith v. the State

Smith v. State, 164 S.W.2d 709 (Tex. Crim. App. 1942)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 10, 1942
Docket
No. 22164.
Judges
Graves, Krueger
Citations
164 S.W.2d 709144 Tex. Crim. 5311942 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 411
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 — Graves

GRAVES, Judge.

Upon his plea of guilty appellant was convicted of theft of property over the value of $50.00, and by the jury sentenced to serve two years in the State prison.

There are no bills of exceptions in the record. Appellant did not offer any defensive matter, but did file an application for a suspended sentence, which request was refused by the jury.

The facts are sufficient to show the theft of four tires, tubes and wheels from the parties named in the indictment.

There is nothing further to review, and no error appearing the judgment is affirmed.

Addendum — Krueger

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

KRUEGER, Judge.

Appellant in his motion for a rehearing contends that we erred in affirming this case on the original submission thereof because he was deprived of a statement of facts without any fault on his part. The record does not sustain appellant’s contention. We find that a statement of the facts proven on the *533 trial was agreed to by the District Attorney and defendant’s counsel who was appointed by the court to represent him and did represent him upon his trial. This statement of facts was approved by the trial judge and ordered filed; and it was filed in due time in the court below and brought to this court with the record. Consequently appellant has not been deprived of a statement of facts.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.

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.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites 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