Hess v. State.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Hess v. State.

168 S.W.2d 250, 145 Tex. Crim. 343, 1943 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 745

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedFebruary 3, 1943

DocketNo. 22380

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 168 S.W.2d 250 (Hess 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

Hess v. State., 168 S.W.2d 250, 145 Tex. Crim. 343, 1943 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 745 (Tex. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of transporting liquor over a public highway in Panola County, a dry area. No statement of facts is found in the record and it is not shown how much [344]*344liquor was involved. Statements made in appellant’s brief cannot be considered on questions of fact. We note, however, from the one bill of exception approved by the court that it was admitted by the State that the defendant purchased the whisky in a wet area and that he was transporting same in a dry area “to his home for his own consumption.” It is not a violation of law to transport intoxicating liquor into a dry area from a wet area for personal use. Art. 666-23a Vernon’s Ann. P. C. Appellant’s motion for a new trial should have been granted. Walton v. State, 163 S. W. (2d) 203.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of transporting liquor over a public highway in Panola County, a dry area. No statement of facts is found in the record and it is not shown how much [344]*344liquor was involved. Statements made in appellant’s brief cannot be considered on questions of fact. We note, however, from the one bill of exception approved by the court that it was admitted by the State that the defendant purchased the whisky in a wet area and that he was transporting same in a dry area “to his home for his own consumption.” It is not a violation of law to transport intoxicating liquor into a dry area from a wet area for personal use. Art. 666-23a Vernon’s Ann. P. C. Appellant’s motion for a new trial should have been granted. Walton v. State, 163 S. W. (2d) 203.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 S.W.2d 250, 145 Tex. Crim. 343, 1943 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 745, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hess-v-state-texcrimapp-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack