Ingram v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Ingram v. State

56 S.W.2d 1117

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJanuary 18, 1933

DocketNo. 15519

StatusPublished

This text of 56 S.W.2d 1117 (Ingram 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

Ingram v. State, 56 S.W.2d 1117 (Tex. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for transporting intoxicating liquor; punshment, one year in the penitentiary.

There are no bills of exception. The state’s testimony makes out a clear case of transporting intoxicating liquor. That of appellant presents a direct denial of such conduct. It would serve no useful purpose to set out the testimony of either side at length. The jury have accepted the testimony of the state witnesses, and we must uphold this exercise of the power confided in them by statute. ,

The judgment will be affirmed.

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

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for transporting intoxicating liquor; punshment, one year in the penitentiary.

There are no bills of exception. The state’s testimony makes out a clear case of transporting intoxicating liquor. That of appellant presents a direct denial of such conduct. It would serve no useful purpose to set out the testimony of either side at length. The jury have accepted the testimony of the state witnesses, and we must uphold this exercise of the power confided in them by statute. ,

The judgment will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 S.W.2d 1117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ingram-v-state-texcrimapp-1933.