Armstrong v. State

227 S.W. 322, 88 Tex. Crim. 421, 1921 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 263
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Armstrong v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 227 S.W. 485
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided January 26, 1921·No. No. 6038.·Published

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Judge.

In this case appellant was convicted of unlawfully selling intoxicating liquor, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for one year. It appears from the record that appellant entered his plea of guilty and his punishment was fixed by the jury at the minimum penalty fixed by the offense charged in the indictment. Appellant having pleaded guilty, and there being no state *422 ment of facts or bills of exceptions in the record, there appears nothing before us to consider.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Grandberry v. State, 86 Texas Crim. Rep., 232, 216 S. W. Rep., 164; Gipson v. State, 86 Texas Crim. Rep., 364, 216 S. W. Rep., 870.

Affirmed.

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

Armstrong v. State, 227 S.W. 322, 88 Tex. Crim. 421, 1921 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 263 (Tex. 1921).

227 S.W. 322 (Armstrong v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gipson v. State
216 S.W. 870 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1919)
Grandberry v. State
216 S.W. 164 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1919)