Durst v. State
215 S.W. 221, 85 Tex. Crim. 609, 1919 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 502
Opinions
conviction was for assault and battery. The appeal must be dismissed for want of a sufficient recognizance. The statute requires the recognizance must set out in the face of it the amount of punishment assessed against appellant. This recognizance fails to do this.
The appeal, therefore, will be dismissed.
Dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Durst v. State, 215 S.W. 221, 85 Tex. Crim. 609, 1919 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 502 (Tex. 1919).
215 S.W. 221 (Durst v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hamlin v. Bryant
399 S.W.2d 572 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1966)
Culpepper v. State
172 S.W.2d 697 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1943)
Younger Bros., Inc. v. Turner
132 S.W.2d 632 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1939)
Morrow v. State
216 S.W. 1100 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1919)