Alexander v. State

32 S.W.2d 204, 116 Tex. Crim. 256, 1930 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 730
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided June 26, 1930·No. No. 13531.·Published

Opinions

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for possessing intoxicating liquor for purposes of sale; punishment, one year in the penitentiary.

Officers went to appellant’s house in Dublin and found paraphernalia for making intoxicating liquor, eleven pint bottles of beer, some two hundred and fifty or three hundred beer bottles, and a two gallon crock about half full of beer. The testimony was to the effect that said beer was intoxicating.

We find in the record but one bill of exceptions, which complains of the reception of the testimony of the officers because of an alleged insufficient affidavit for search warrant. The affidavit contains the positive averment that the residence to be searched was a place where intoxicating liquor was sold in violation of law. Same was signed by two witnesses, and contained a sufficient description of the property. We are constrained to hold that the bill of exception reveals no error. We deem the evidence sufficient.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Alexander v. State, 32 S.W.2d 204, 116 Tex. Crim. 256, 1930 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 730 (Tex. 1930).

32 S.W.2d 204 (Alexander v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dillon v. State
2 S.W.2d 251 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1928)
Boortz v. State
255 S.W. 434 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Broyles v. State
7 S.W.2d 555 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1928)
Gurski v. State
248 S.W. 353 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Gaunce v. State
261 S.W. 577 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1924)
McFarland v. State
7 S.W.2d 955 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1928)
Booth v. State
9 S.W.2d 1032 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1928)