King v. State

42 S.W.2d 1034, 1931 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 867
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in King v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 113 Tex. Crim. 130
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided October 21, 1931·No. No. 14772·Published

Opinion

CALHOUN, J.

The offense is selling intoxicating liquor; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary 'for two years.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. We note that the verdict of the jury finding the appellant guilty assessed his punishment at two years in the penitentiary, while the sentence fixed his punishment at confinement in the penitentiary for a straight term of two years. The sentence will therefore be reformed so as to assess appellant’s punishment at confinement in the penitentiary for an indeterminate period of not less than one year nor more than two years, and, as so reformed, no question being presented for review, the judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

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

King v. State, 42 S.W.2d 1034, 1931 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 867 (Tex. 1931).

42 S.W.2d 1034 (King v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.