Fortenberry v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Fortenberry v. State

89 S.W. 646, 48 Tex. Crim. 548, 1905 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 266

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedOctober 18, 1905

DocketNo. 3130.

StatusPublished

This text of 89 S.W. 646 (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.

Bluebook

Fortenberry v. State, 89 S.W. 646, 48 Tex. Crim. 548, 1905 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 266 (Tex. 1905).

Pincite

Opinions

HENDERSON, Judge.

The Assistant Attorney-General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the recognizance is defective, in that it does not state the amount of the punishment assessed against appellant. An examination of the recognizance shows that the motion is well taken. Art. 887, Code Crim. Proc.; May v. State, 40 Texas Crim. Rep., 196. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Dismissed.

ON REHEARING.

December 13, 1905.

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