46 S.W.2d 973 | Tex. Crim. App. | 1932
The offense is burglary; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.
The store of Thad Ray was burglarized and an automatic shotgun stolen therefrom. About a year later the shotgun was obtained by Mill, the city marshal, from one Gibson.
The following in substance, is the testimony of Gibson: He got the gun from Billups soon after the burglary. Billups came to the home of Gibson on a Sunday morning and said he had a gun that he wanted to
The witness indicated that he did not want to tell anybody who was meddling about his business. He said further: “I thought Rideway was meddling when he said I had better hide the gun. I didn’t hide it, and I didn’t show it to' anyone. I didn’t tell anyone I had it. I didn’t try to find but whom it belonged to. * * * The gun was worth more than ten dollars. I didn’t talk to anyone about it. I believed that something was wrong after I talked to Ed Rideway, but I didn’t try to find out who the gun belonged to.”
There was testimony that Gibson had stated that he had bought the gun for $15 and had paid $10 down..
Whether the witness Gibson should be classified as an accomplice witness is regarded as a question for the jury to solve. His possession of the stolen property is conceded. It also appears from his testimony that he received the property directly from the thief, and that he had advanced and agreed to advance upon it an amount less than its value. He did not disclose his possession of the property or the source from which he acquired it for many months after its acquisition. When inquiry was first made as to his possession of the property, he disclaimed knowledge of it. When he received information which he regarded as showing that
In appropriate language the sufficiency of the charge of the court was challenged because of the omission of an instruction to the jury on accomplice testimony as applied to the witness Gibson. In refusing it, the learned trial judge, in our opinion, was in error. The importance of Gibson’s testimony cannot be questioned. It was essential to the conviction.
The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
Reversed and remanded.