Leak v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Leak v. State

278 S.W. 1117, 102 Tex. Crim. 407, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1156

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided December 16, 1925·No. No. 9877.·Published

Opinion

HAWKINS, Judge.

Appellant is under conviction for passing a forged instrument, his punishment having been assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for three years.

By affidavit of the sheriff of Red River County .it is made to appear that pending this appeal appellant was confined in the jail of Red River County from which he has escaped and up to the present time has not been recaptured. Under Article 824, 1925 Revision, the jurisdiction of this Court is ousted by reason of appellant’s escape and the appeal is dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

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

HAWKINS, Judge.

Appellant is under conviction for passing a forged instrument, his punishment having been assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for three years.

By affidavit of the sheriff of Red River County .it is made to appear that pending this appeal appellant was confined in the jail of Red River County from which he has escaped and up to the present time has not been recaptured. Under Article 824, 1925 Revision, the jurisdiction of this Court is ousted by reason of appellant’s escape and the appeal is dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Leak v. State, 278 S.W. 1117, 102 Tex. Crim. 407, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1156 (Tex. 1925).

Pincite

278 S.W. 1117 (Leak v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.