Driggs v. State
This text of 66 S.W. 546 (Driggs 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
Appellant was convicted of gaming, and fined $10. The Assistant Attorney-General has filed the following motion to dismiss this appeal, to wit: “Appellant was charged with the offense of gaming, and upon trial was convicted, and his punishment, as shown by the verdict and judgment herein, assessed at a fine of ten dollars; that subsequent to the conviction, and in open court, he entered into a recognizance which describes the offense as being a misdemeanor, and the punishment as being a fine of twenty-five dollars. Therefore the State would show the court there is a variance between the recognizance and the verdict and judgment herein; that the recognizance misdescribes the judgment of the court, in that the judgment was for ten dollars, and the recognizance recites the same as a judgment for twenty-five dollars. Wherefore the State prays the court to dismiss this appeal, because there is not such recognizance herein as required by article 887, Code of Criminal Procedure, and therefore this court is without jurisdiction.” An inspection of the record shows it sustains the motion, and it is accordingly sustained.
The appeal is dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
66 S.W. 546, 43 Tex. Crim. 406, 1902 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/driggs-v-state-texcrimapp-1902.