King v. State
This text of 286 S.W.2d 422 (King 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.
Opinion
By Sec. 4, of Art. 93b, Vernon’s R. C. S., it is made unlawful for any person to sell any agricultural seed having a false labeling.
This is a conviction under that statute, with punishment fixed at a fine of $5. The prosecution arose and was commenced in the county court.
The information charges only that the appellant “did then and there unlawfully sell agricultural seed that were falsely labeled.” There is no allegation as to whom the sale was made.
Art. 406, C. C. P., provides that “To charge an unlawful sale, it is necessary to name the purchaser.”
*454 In Keeton v. State, 159 Tex. Cr. R. 431, 264 S. W. 2d 737, we held it necessary that in order to charge the offense of unlawfully selling whisky in a dry area the information must allege the name of the purchaser, if known, and, if unknown, that fact should be alleged. See, also, Hoover v. State, 97 Tex. Cr. R. 91, 259 S. W. 1088.
The information in this case being fatally defective for failing to name the purchaser, the judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
286 S.W.2d 422, 162 Tex. Crim. 453, 1956 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-state-texcrimapp-1956.