Opinion
No. 13943.
Delivered January 28, 1931.
Burglary — Evidence.
In prosecution for burglarizing a chicken-house, some of the chickens thrown from the car in which appellant was fleeing from the officers were identified as the chickens which belonged to the owner of the burglarized house and the verdict is supported by the evidence, since appellant offered no explanation of his possession of the stolen property.
Appeal from the District Court of Young County. Tried below before Hon. Allan D. Montgomery, Judge.
Appeal from a conviction for burglary; penalty, confinement in the penitentiary for three years.
The opinion states the case.
Affirmed.
W. T. Williams, Jr., of Austin, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Attorney, of Austin, for the State.
CONVICTION FOR BURGLARY; PUNISHMENT, THREE YEARS IN THE PENITENTIARY.
The record is here without any bills of exception. The burglarized building was a hen house from which nine hens were taken. Parties pursued appellant and a companion in a car on the night of the burglary and finally overhauled them. As they fled they had thrown out chickens which were picked up and a number of them were identified by the owner. Some of the chickens taken were setting hens which when carried back to the hen house and released went upon the nests where they had been formerly setting. Appellant introduced no testimony. He took the stand in his own behalf, but made a sort of rambling argument to the effect that everybody was losing chickens and somebody had to be convicted and he supposed he would be made the victim. He made no attempt to explain his possession of the chickens, or how he came by them, nor did he deny the testimony of the parties who overtook him and his companion on the night of the alleged burglary.
The judgment will be affirmed.
Affirmed.