King v. State

286 S.W.2d 422, 162 Tex. Crim. 453, 1956 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1242
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided February 1, 1956·No. 28012·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

DAVIDSON, Judge.

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

King v. State, 286 S.W.2d 422, 162 Tex. Crim. 453, 1956 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1242 (Tex. 1956).

286 S.W.2d 422 (King v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Laury v. State
508 S.W.2d 856 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1974)
State v. Bissette
108 S.E.2d 858 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1959)
Poston v. State
296 S.W.2d 542 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1956)
Threadgill v. State
292 S.W.2d 121 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1956)
Treadgill v. State
292 S.W.2d 121 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1956)