Home/Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas/King v. State

King v. State

253 S.W. 262, 95 Tex. Crim. 93, 1922 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 725
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 22, 1922·No. No. 7219.·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinions

Appellant was convicted in the District Court of Shackelford County of the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor, and his punishment fixed at one year in the penitentiary.

Our Assistant Attorney General has moved to dismiss the appeal in this case because the recognizance on appeal is insufficient. An examination of same reveals the fact that it fails to name the offense for which conviction was had. In Gross v. State,83 Tex. Crim. 349, this was held fatal to the recognizance. The motion of the State is, therefore, granted and the appeal is ordered dismissed.

Dismissed.

ON MOTION TO REINSTATE APPEAL.
January 17, 1923.

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

King v. State, 253 S.W. 262, 95 Tex. Crim. 93, 1922 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 725 (Tex. 1922).

253 S.W. 262 (King v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Perkins v. State
213 S.W.2d 681 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1948)
Ledesma v. State
181 S.W.2d 705 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1944)
Huff v. State
165 S.W.2d 717 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1942)
Hodges v. State
71 S.W.2d 520 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1933)
Shurbet v. State
60 S.W.2d 791 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1933)
Slone v. State
50 S.W.2d 301 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1932)
Lacy v. State
29 S.W.2d 754 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1930)
Parker v. State
261 S.W. 782 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)