Fitzgerald v. State

225 S.W. 1096, 88 Tex. Crim. 268, 1920 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 424
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided December 8, 1920·No. No. 5993.·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

MORROW, Judge.

This is an appeal of T. M. Mirick and W J. Mays from a judgment of $750 on a forfeited bail bond. The judgment nisi is upon a bond of Louis Fitzgerald, Principal, and Roy Mays, T. M. Mirick and W. J. Mays, sureties. The bond proved on this trial was one in which Louis Fitzgerald was principal, and T. M. Mirick and W. J. Mays sureties. A variance was urged in the court below, and is insisted upon in this appeal. The names of the parties to the appearance bond is an essential part of the judgment nisi, and upon an effort to make the judgment final a variance such as that described was a matter so material as to render the bond inadmissible. White’s Texas Penal Code, p. 315, sec. 427; Lowe v. State, 15 Texas, 141; Cassady v. State, 4 Texas Crim. App., 96; Hutchins v. State, 24 Texas Crim. App., 242; Brown v. State, 28 Texas Crim. App., 65.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded

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

Fitzgerald v. State, 225 S.W. 1096, 88 Tex. Crim. 268, 1920 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 424 (Tex. 1920).

225 S.W. 1096 (Fitzgerald v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hokr v. State
545 S.W.2d 463 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1977)
Joe's Bonding Company v. State
481 S.W.2d 145 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1972)
Morris v. State
45 So. 2d 318 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1950)