Heald v. State
This text of 72 S.W.2d 910 (Heald 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.
Opinions
The conviction is for the *586 unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for one year.
It appears from the record that the appellant is at large upon an appeal bond. However, the bond is inadequate in that it fails to show that it was approved by the trial judge. Art. 818, C. C. P., 1925, provides that the bond must be approved by the sheriff and also by the court trying the case. See Stine v. State, 38 S. W. (2d) 331; Lamar v. State, 40 S. W. (2d) 162; Franks v. State, 42 S. W. (2d) 1016. The bond in the present instance contains only the approval of the sheriff.
For the reason stated, the appeal is dismissed.
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.2d 910, 126 Tex. Crim. 585, 1934 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 793, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heald-v-state-texcrimapp-1934.