Laminack v. State
This text of 247 S.W. 282 (Laminack 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
Conviction is for manufacturing intoxicating liquor; punishment, one year in the penitentiary.
The indictment alleges, and the proof shows that the alleged offense was committed on November 10th, 1921. This was before the amended act of the 37th Legislature. C. 61, p. 233, 1st and 2d C. S., went into effect, and this prosecution therefore was controlled by the law passed at 2d C. S. Thirty-sixth Legislature. In order to charge an offense under that law it was necessary to negative the exceptions. Th.e indictment in the present case fails to do so. McNeil v. State, 91 Texas Crim. Rep., 402, 239 S. W. Rep., 954; Stringer v. State, 92 Texas Crim. Rep., 46 241 S. W. Rep., 159; Bell v. State, 92 Texas Crim. Rep., 342, 243 S. W. Rep., 1095.
No offense being charged> the judgment must be reversed, and dismissal of the prosecution under the present indictment ordered.
Reversed and dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
247 S.W. 282, 93 Tex. Crim. 238, 1923 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laminack-v-state-texcrimapp-1923.