
    HALL v. STATE.
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Jan. 21, 1914.)
    Larceny (§ 57*) — Hog Theft — Evidence.
    Where defendant’s only defense was that he thought the hog which he killed was his own, and no complaint was made as to the court’s manner of submitting the question to the jury, a judgment of conviction is not “contrary to the law and evidence.”
    TEd. Note. — Eor other cases, see Larceny,. Cent. Dig. §§ 150, 151; Dec. Dig. § 57.*]
    Appeal from District Court, Cass County;. H. E. O’Neal, Judge.
    
      Hardy Hall was convicted of crime, and lie appeals.
    Affirmed.
    O. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   HARPER, J.

Appellant was convicted of the theft of a hog, and his punishment assessed at two years’ confinement in the state penitentiary.

The only complaint in the motion is that the “judgment is contrary to the law and the evidence.” There is no question in the evidence but that appellant killed the hog, and carried it to his house. His defense that he took it, believing it to be his own, was submitted by the court to the jury in a way not complained of by appellant, and under such circumstances the judgment must be affirmed.

Affirmed.  