
    ROSEBUD v. STATE.
    (No. 5793.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    April 28, 1920.)
    Weapons <®=>7 — Carrying borrowed pistol home does not constitute unlawfully carrying arms.
    In a prosecution for unlawfully carrying arms, where it appeared that defendant got a pistol from his brother, to whom he had loaned it, and carried it 30 miles to another town, where he lived, the conviction could not be sustained; defendant having a right to take his pistol home.
    Appeal from Nacogdoches County Court; J. M. Marshall, Judge.
    Bullie Rosebud was convicted of violating the law prohibiting carrying of arms, and he appeals.
    Reversed and remanded.
    S. M. Adams, of Nacogdoches, for appellant.
    Alvin M. Owsley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   DAVIDSON, P. J.

Appellant was convicted for violating the law prohibiting- the carrying of arms.

The evidence relied upon by the state shows that appellant was traveling the public highway, stopped to buy watermelons, and at the time discovered something wrong with his auto. In order to rectify this he secured from under the seat of- the auto the necessary tools. In doing so he took a pistol from the box and placed it on the seat of his car. At this juncture the state’s witness Christian saw the pistol. The evidence'further shows that appellant lived in Nacog-doches, was a jitney driver, and operated his car for hire; that he had gone from Nacogdoches to" Alto, a distance of 30 miles, where he spent the night, and on the following day returned to Nacogdoches. A party accompanied him in the car from Alto to Nacogdoches. The evidence further discloses that, when appellant was prepared to leave Alto for his home at Nacogdoches, he went to his brother’s place of business and got his (appellant’s) pistol. The brother had had it for about three months; that he placed the pistol under the seat of his car to carry it to his home in Nacogdoches. Eh route home, and within about 4 miles of Nacogdoches, meeting a party with melons he stopped to purchase some. This is the substance of the facts.

It is the unbroken line of authority in this state that a party has a right to carry his pistol home, to his residence, or place of business under legitimate circumstances. If appellant got the pistol at Alto from his brother, to whom he loaned it, and carried it 30 miles to Nacogdoches, it would not constitute a violation of the law. It is unnecessary to discuss the question as to whether he was a traveler or not. He had a right to take his pistol home, and this would not be violative of the statute.

The judgment will be reversed, and the cause remanded. 
      <@^>For other eases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     