Brown v. State

158 S.W. 994, 71 Tex. Crim. 212, 1913 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 409
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Brown v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 61 Tex. Crim. 334
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided June 27, 1913·No. No. 2638.·Published

Opinion

HARPER, Judge.

In this case the appellants were prosecuted and convicted for theft and their punishment assessed at five years confinement in the penitentiary. The jury, however, in their verdict, under proper instructions from the court, find “that the defendants have never heretofore been convicted of a felony in this State or in any other State, and recommend a suspension of sentence by the court.”

The court, however, ignored this portion of the verdict of the jury, and sentenced them to the penitentiary. Eecently in the case of Baker v. State, 70 Texas Crim. Rep., 618, we had this question before us and held the court had no authority to pass sentence upon such a verdict, under the law of this State. The sentence is a nullity because in violation of the statute, and this cause is remanded with instructions to release the prisoners upon recognizance as is provided by chapter 7 of the Acts of the Thirty-third Legislature.

Eemanded with instructions.

Reversed, and remanded with instructions.

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

Brown v. State, 158 S.W. 994, 71 Tex. Crim. 212, 1913 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 409 (Tex. 1913).

158 S.W. 994 (Brown v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Baker v. State
158 S.W. 998 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1913)