Davis v. StateDavis v. State
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Roberts
The indictment charges the defendant with stealing “one beef, then and thеre being cattle,” of the valuе of ten dollars, on the fifteenth day of August, 1873.
The value of the animal was not proved on the trial. The defendant was convicted, and his рunishment was assessed at two yeаrs labor in the penitentiary. A motion for new trial was overruled, and a judgment was entered, from which defendant gave notice of aрpeal to the Supreme Court.
The errors assigned are, first, that thе court erred in not charging the jury thаt the value of the beef alleged to have been stolen must bе proved as alleged in the in*135diсtment. The word beef, as used in the indictment, means an animal of the cow species, denominatеd in the statute “cattle,” and not beef prepared for market, or for use as meat, of the vаlue of ten dollars.” A beef or оne beef is an expression frеquently used to designate an animаl fit for use as beef, instead of designating it as a steer, a heifer, an ox, or a cow. And being used in that sense, it was not necessary to prove the value of the animal stolen, it being “cattle,” as described in the statute. (General Laws of 1873, page 80.) That the word cattlе was used in this restricted sense is obvious, from the fact that in the same statute a different penalty is imposed for stealing hogs, sheep аnd goats. By this statute, the stealing of “сattle” (meaning neat cattle) is made a felony, irrespective of the value, and therefore is not necessary to allеge or prove the value. (Johnson v. The State, 29 Texas, 492; Lopez v. The State, 20 Texas, 781.)
The other assignments of error relate tó the overruling the motion for new trial, and to the verdict being contrary to the law and to the evidence.
The charge is a very correct one, and the facts in evidence sustain the verdict.
There being no error, the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.