Foreman v. State
28 S.W.2d 560, 115 Tex. Crim. 179, 1930 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 403
Opinions
The conviction is for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor; punishment, two years in the penitentiary.
The facts in the case amply support the judgment. The only bill of exception in the record complains of the overruling of the motion for new trial. Said motion sets up no error other than those alleged to have occurred during the trial. No matters of misconduct or newly discovered evidence or anything of that kind were alleged. The testimony need not be set out.
The judgment will be affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Foreman v. State, 28 S.W.2d 560, 115 Tex. Crim. 179, 1930 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 403 (Tex. 1930).
28 S.W.2d 560 (Foreman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Christopher Ray Weatherspoon v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2015