Byrom v. State
256 S.W.2d 853
Opinion
The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, a fine of $100. •
The jurat affixed to the complaint does not show that the complaint was *854 sworn to before an officer authorized to administer the oath required under the provisions of Article 415, C.C.P. Stanley v. State, 143 Tex.Cr.R. 350, 158 S.W.2d 785; Neely v. State, 144 Tex.Cr.R. 92, 161 S.W.2d 294; and cases1 cited therein.
A valid complaint is a prerequisite to a valid information.
The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Byrom v. State, 256 S.W.2d 853 (Tex. 1953).
256 S.W.2d 853 (Byrom v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bender v. State
171 Tex. Crim. 628 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1962)
Livesay v. State
291 S.W.2d 954 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1956)
Womack v. State
286 S.W.2d 140 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1956)
Addison v. State
283 S.W.2d 55 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1955)