TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kasparek v. State

Ed Kasparek and Vernon Vogel v. State

Kasparek v. State, 103 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App. 1937)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 17, 1937
Docket
No. 18878
Judges
Hawkins
Citations
103 S.W.2d 157132 Tex. Crim. 1521937 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 157

Opinion of the Court — Hawkins

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

HAWKINS, Judge.

— Appellants were jointly indicted and tried for burglary, the trial resulted in the conviction of both, *153 with punishment assessed against each of three years in the penitentiary.

The charge against them was the burglary of the store belonging to H. F. Grayson with intent to commit theft. Gray-son had closed his store for the night but after he left the store it began to rain; he went back to close the transoms. He discovered that the lock had been broken on the back door and that someone was in the store. He gave the alarm and when officers arrived and went in the store the two appellants were inside. The cash register had been opened and some five or six dollars had been taken from it. Money corresponding in that amount was found on appellants. Some cigarettes and other property had been moved from their accustomed place in the store to the rear of it, apparently in preparation for removal from the store. An automobile which was being used by appellants was parked nearby.

We see no merit in appellants’ objection to the court’s charge defining theft, nor the objection to evidence showing that money had been taken from the cash register. The charge against appellants was that they burglarized the store with intent to commit theft, and the evidence was pertinent to sustain the averments in the indictment, and the charge was proper as advising the jury of the statutory meaning of the term theft.

Proof that appellants escaped from jail where they were being held awaiting trial was properly admitted. Branch’s Ann. Tex. P. C., Sec. 135; Waite v. State, 13 Texas Crim. Rep., 169 ; 18 Tex. Jur., Sec. 25, page 45.

Finding no error in the record the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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