Collins v. State
This text of 29 S.W. 274 (Collins v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
On a former day of the term the State submitted a motion to dismiss this appeal on account of a defective recognizance. A correct recognizance has been filed, supplying this defect, wherefore the motion is overruled.
A reversal of judgment is sought, upon the ground that the evidence is not sufficient to show appellant sold the liquor on Sunday, as alleged. That the sale was made is beyond dispute. That it was on Sunday is equally certain, and, under the facts, we think it is immaterial whether appellant, as barkeeper, or his servant, the porter, waited upon the customer. They were both behind the bar, in front of the customer, and standing together at the time, but the witness testified, that he could not state which of the two waited on him or received the pay. The porter was under the control and subject to the orders of the bartender, the appellant in this case. Under this state of case, we think it immaterial who did wait upon the customer. It is unnecessary to elaborate this question.
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Judges all present and concurring.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 S.W. 274, 34 Tex. Crim. 95, 1895 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collins-v-state-texcrimapp-1895.