Ferguson v. State
147 S.W. 239, 66 Tex. Crim. 426, 1912 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 284
Opinions
The Assistant Attorney-General has moved to dismiss the appeal, because the recognizance is not in compliance with article 919 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The recognizance does not state the punishment assessed, and the motion is sustained. May v. The State, 40 Texas Crim. Rep., 196; Johnson v. The State, 49 S. W. Rep., 594; Martin v. The State, 89 S. W. Rep., 642.
Appeal dismissed.
Dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ferguson v. State, 147 S.W. 239, 66 Tex. Crim. 426, 1912 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 284 (Tex. 1912).
147 S.W. 239 (Ferguson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Johnson v. State
54 S.W.2d 140 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1932)
Clark v. State
46 S.W.2d 971 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1932)
Williams v. State
27 S.W.2d 226 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1930)
Flores v. State
198 S.W. 875 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1917)