Allen v. State

79 S.W. 642, 47 Tex. Crim. 65, 1904 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 224
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Allen v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 44 Tex. Crim. 63
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided March 9, 1904·No. No. 2968.·Published

Opinion

DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

The Assistant Attorney-General has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the recognizance does not comply with the form prescribed in article 887, Code of Criminal Procedure, for recognizances. The recognizance reads * * * “conditioned that the said John Allen, who has been counseled in the County Court of Tarrant County, Texas, this case of a misdemeanor, and his punishment assessed,” etc. The word “counseled” should be “convicted” as prescribed by the form in article 887, Code of Criminal Procedure. So as the recognizance does not make it appear that appellant had been convicted, in our opinion the motion is well taken. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Dismissed.

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

Allen v. State, 79 S.W. 642, 47 Tex. Crim. 65, 1904 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 224 (Tex. 1904).

79 S.W. 642 (Allen v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.