
    PARTRIDGE v. STATE.
    (No. 4354.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    March 14, 1917.)
    Fish &wkey;>15 — Seining—Sufficiency of Information.
    Under a statute (Pen. Code 1911, art. 870) prohibiting catching fish by nets or seines without the consent of the owner of the lake, etc., and Code Cr. Proc. 1911, art. 457,_ specifying how ownership shall be alleged, an information and complaint charging seining without the owner’s consent, but not giving his name, is insufficient.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Fish, Cent. Dig. §§ 27-30.]
    Appeal from Throckmorton County Court; A. H. King, Judge.
    J. A. Partridge was convicted of seining fish contrary to statute, and appeals. Judgment reversed, and prosecution ordered dismissed.
    E. B. Hendricks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   DAVIDSON, P. J.

The complaint and information charge appellant with taking, catching, ensnaring, and entrapping fish by means of nets and seines and by muddying, ditching and draining in a pond without the consent of the owner of such pond.

The complaint and information fail to allege the name of the owner of the waters said to have been netted or seined. The .statute (Pen. Code, art. 8,70) provides that the waters netted or seined must be so done without the consent of the owner. Wherever ownership enters into the definition of an offense, the name of the owner must be alleged. It is unnecessary, we think, to cite particular cases or make quotations. The statute (article 457, of the Revised O. O. P.) makes such provision, and the authorities holding that the name of the owner must be alleged will be found collated in the notes in Vernon’s Ann. O. C. P., under article 457. It seems to be the settled law in Texas that all constituent elements contained in the definition of the offense must be charged in the complaint and information; if not, the offense is not' charged. This was called to the attention of the trial court in a timely and proper way and overruled. In this there was error. The complaint and information are not sufficient.

The judgment will therefore be reversed, and the prosecution ordered dismissed. 
      <fc»For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     