Colquitt v. StateColquitt v. State
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- Junell
This appeal follows appellant’s plea of guilty to an indictment charging theft of property valued at less than $200.00. The court found him guilty of a third degree felony and assessed punishment at two years imprisonment.
In his only ground of error, appellant contends that the court convicted him of a crime for which he was not charged. We agree. The indictment alleged a primary offense of theft of property valued under $200.00, with two “enhancement” paragraphs alleging that appellant was twice previously convicted of felony credit card abuse.
As the state concedes, credit card abuse is not “theft” within the meaning of
Charles Burnell Colquitt ... did then and there unlawfully commit an offense ... in that he did appropriate property, namely, two packages of meat, owned by Gary Smith, a person having a greater right to possession of the property than *129 the defendant ... of the value of under Two Hundred Dollars with the intent to deprive the complainant of the property and without the effective consent of the complainant...
Although the indictment in the instant case is sufficient to allege a misdemeanor offense, its failure to allege the minimum value of the property makes it impossible to delineate the class of misdemeanor alleged. Thus, the indictment will support only a conviction for the least class C misdemeanor offense. See, Smith v. State, 573 S.W.2d 546 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Suarez v. State, 532 S.W.2d 602 (Tex.Cr.App.1976); Schoenberg v. State, 624 S.W.2d 808 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1981, pet. ref‘d).
Since the 177th District Court appears to have jurisdiction over misdemeanors by virtue of Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 199 §§ 174, 177 (Vernon 1969) the judgment is reformed to show a conviction for a class C misdemeanor and the cause is reversed and remanded for assessment of punishment in accordance with this opinion.