Adkins v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Adkins v. State

167 S.W.2d 1029, 145 Tex. Crim. 287, 1942 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 565

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedDecember 9, 1942

DocketNo. 22328

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 167 S.W.2d 1029 (Adkins v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adkins v. State, 167 S.W.2d 1029, 145 Tex. Crim. 287, 1942 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 565 (Tex. 1942).

Pincite

Opinions

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is from a fine of $50.00 and thirty days in jail on a charge of procuring.

The record before us contains no bills of exception. The case was tried before the court without a jury and we are not advised as to the grounds for reversal which may be relied upon by appellant. Only two witnesses testified: The officer who made an investigation of the premises and the woman who was involved, according to the State’s theory, at the instance of appellant. The officer’s testimony made a case under the law, while the woman’s evidence entirely exonerated him. Evidently the judge hearing the case did not believe her testimony. The guilt of the appellant depended upon his findings.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is from a fine of $50.00 and thirty days in jail on a charge of procuring.

The record before us contains no bills of exception. The case was tried before the court without a jury and we are not advised as to the grounds for reversal which may be relied upon by appellant. Only two witnesses testified: The officer who made an investigation of the premises and the woman who was involved, according to the State’s theory, at the instance of appellant. The officer’s testimony made a case under the law, while the woman’s evidence entirely exonerated him. Evidently the judge hearing the case did not believe her testimony. The guilt of the appellant depended upon his findings.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 S.W.2d 1029, 145 Tex. Crim. 287, 1942 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 565, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adkins-v-state-texcrimapp-1942.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack