Clark v. State

24 S.W. 29, 32 Tex. Crim. 412, 1893 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 298
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 4, 1893·No. No. 692.·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

HURT, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of slander, and prosecutes this appeal.

The indictment is insufficient. The slander consists in stating that Fannie Mazingo is pregnant and will give birth to a child in a few days. It should have excluded the fact that she was lawfully or legitimately *413 pregnant. The record contains no plea for defendant. This is fatal to the judgment. Willson’s Crim. Proc., secs. 2577, 2110.

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution dismissed.

Reversed and dismissed.

Judges all present and concurring.

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

Clark v. State, 24 S.W. 29, 32 Tex. Crim. 412, 1893 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 298 (Tex. 1893).

24 S.W. 29 (Clark v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jaime Ricardo Perez v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2013
Rodriguez, Francisco
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006
Francisco Rodriguez v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2005
Michael Howard Bradley v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999
Sims v. State
91 S.W. 579 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1906)