Bird v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Bird v. State

134 S.W. 687, 61 Tex. Crim. 205, 1911 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 57

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bird v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 66 Tex. Crim. 611 →

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided February 8, 1911·No. No. 937.·Published

Opinion

HARPER, Judge.

—The Assistant Attorney-General moves to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the recognizance is not sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon this court in that the same does not name the court in which appellant was convicted, nor does it state the amount of the punishment imposed by the verdict of the jury, as require^ by article 887 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and decisions of this court construing this article. An inspection of the recognizance shows that it is defective in this respect, wherefore the motion of the Assistant Attorney-General to dismiss is sustained, and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Dismissed.

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

HARPER, Judge.

—The Assistant Attorney-General moves to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the recognizance is not sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon this court in that the same does not name the court in which appellant was convicted, nor does it state the amount of the punishment imposed by the verdict of the jury, as require^ by article 887 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and decisions of this court construing this article. An inspection of the recognizance shows that it is defective in this respect, wherefore the motion of the Assistant Attorney-General to dismiss is sustained, and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Dismissed.

Bird v. State, 134 S.W. 687, 61 Tex. Crim. 205, 1911 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 57 (Tex. 1911).

Pincite

134 S.W. 687 (Bird v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.