Holland v. State

101 S.W. 1004, 51 Tex. Crim. 157, 1907 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 93
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Holland v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 52 Tex. Crim. 160
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided March 13, 1907·No. No. 3691.·Published

Opinion

BROOKS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of violating the local option law. This case is reversed upon the authority of cause No. 3692, Holland v. State, decided on a previous day of this term. The writer of this opinion construes article 5060j of the Revised Civil Statutes to mean that after the notice by the county .judge to a party to give a new bond, and he fails to do so, and the party sells whisky after receiving such notice, he can be prosecuted for a sale of the intoxicant in a local option district without having given the requisite bond as held in Robinson v. State, 8 Texas Ct. Rep., 137.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Holland v. State, 101 S.W. 1004, 51 Tex. Crim. 157, 1907 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 93 (Tex. 1907).

101 S.W. 1004 (Holland v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.