Fortenberry v. State
This text of 72 S.W. 588 (Fortenberry 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
is made to dismiss the appeal because of the insufficiency of the recognizance. It binds appellant to abide the “judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals,” but fails to conclude, as the statute requires, “in this case.” This precise question -came up in Cryer v. State, 36 Texas Crim. Rep., 621, and it was there held that the recognizance was not sufficient. See also Duffer v. State (Texas Crim. App.), 38 S. W. Rep., 997. The motion is sustained. The appeal is dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
72 S.W. 588, 44 Tex. Crim. 535, 1903 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 67, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fortenberry-v-state-texcrimapp-1903.