Barnes v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Barnes v. State

234 S.W.2d 58, 155 Tex. Crim. 255, 1950 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1830

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedNovember 22, 1950

DocketNo. 24991

StatusPublished

This text of 234 S.W.2d 58 (Barnes 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

Barnes v. State, 234 S.W.2d 58, 155 Tex. Crim. 255, 1950 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1830 (Tex. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was assessed a fine of $250.00 by a jury verdict on a charge of possessing liquor for the purpose of sale.

When the jury was impanelled the county attorney began reading the complaint to the jury, instead of the information. Defendant duly objected to the reading of the complaint. The court overruled his objection, to which defendant excepted.

The complaint is an affidavit which is hearsay evidence and not admissible in evidence. The pleading in the case is the information filed by the county attorney. It should be perfectly clear, as we have often held, that the complaint should not be read to the jury.

For the error discussed the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause is remanded.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was assessed a fine of $250.00 by a jury verdict on a charge of possessing liquor for the purpose of sale.

When the jury was impanelled the county attorney began reading the complaint to the jury, instead of the information. Defendant duly objected to the reading of the complaint. The court overruled his objection, to which defendant excepted.

The complaint is an affidavit which is hearsay evidence and not admissible in evidence. The pleading in the case is the information filed by the county attorney. It should be perfectly clear, as we have often held, that the complaint should not be read to the jury.

For the error discussed the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause is remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

234 S.W.2d 58, 155 Tex. Crim. 255, 1950 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1830, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnes-v-state-texcrimapp-1950.