Burton v. State

90 S.W. 498, 48 Tex. Crim. 544, 1905 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 262
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided October 11, 1905·No. No. 3111.·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinions

BROOKS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of violating the local option law, his punishment being fixed at a fine of $50 and twenty days confinement in the county jail.

The Assistant Attorney-General has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal because the recognizance is defective, in that it does not state the amount of the' punishment assessed against appellant, as required by article 887, Code Criminal Procedure. An examination of the recognizance shows that the motion is well taken. May v. State, 40 Texas Crim. Rep., 196. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Dismissed.

ON REHEARING.

November 22, 1905.

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

Burton v. State, 90 S.W. 498, 48 Tex. Crim. 544, 1905 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 262 (Tex. 1905).

90 S.W. 498 (Burton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

White v. State
151 S.W. 826 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1912)
Howell v. State
148 S.W. 302 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1912)
Hinton v. State
144 S.W. 617 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1912)
Nelson v. State
119 S.W. 846 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1909)