Jackson and Shine v. State

21 S.W.2d 298, 113 Tex. Crim. 427, 1929 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 689
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided October 30, 1929·No. No. 12678.·Published

Opinion

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is tampering with 'an automobile ; the punishment confinement in jail for sixty days.

Appellants entered into a joint recognizance. A joint recognizance on appeal will not confer jurisdiction on this court. Our decisions are to the effect that each appellant must give a separate recognizance. Branch’s Annotated Penal Code of Texas, sec. 614. Irvin v. State, 32 S. W. 899; Bowers v. State, 33 S. W. 974; Goldman v. State, 34 S. W. 122; McMeans v. State, 38 S. W. 998; Hodges v. State, 38 S. W. 1019; Hogg v. State, 48 S. W. 580; Haverbekken et al. v. State, 200 S. W. 524.

Appellants are granted fifteen days from this date in which to perfect their appeal.

The appeal is dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

*428 The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

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

Jackson and Shine v. State, 21 S.W.2d 298, 113 Tex. Crim. 427, 1929 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 689 (Tex. 1929).

21 S.W.2d 298 (Jackson and Shine v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Haverbekken v. State
200 S.W. 524 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1918)
Campbell v. State
32 S.W. 899 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1895)
McMeans v. State
38 S.W. 998 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1897)
W. Goldman & Co. v. State
34 S.W. 122 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1896)
Hogg v. State
48 S.W. 580 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1898)
Morton v. State
38 S.W. 1019 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1897)