Loftin v. State
This text of 261 S.W. 1031 (Loftin 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 the sale of intoxicating liquor with a punishment of one year in the penitentiary.
The indictment alleged the sale of intoxicating liquor but omitted the name of the alleged purchaser. A motion to quash the indictment because of this omission was presented and overruled.
Article 464, C. C. P., reads as follows:
“In an indictment for selling intoxicating liquors in violation of any law of this state, it shall be sufficient to charge that the defendant sold intoxicating liquors contrary to law, naming the person to whom sold, without stating the quantity sold; and, under such indictment, any act of selling in violation of- the law may be proved.”
In addition to the foregoing statute, we cite Dixon v. State, 21. Texas Crim. App., 517, 1 S. W. Rep., 448; Drechsel v. State, 35 Texas Crim. Rep., 580, 34 S. W. Rep., 934; Ex parte Campbell, 67 Texas Crim Rep., 171; as directly in point and holding that it is absolutely essential to name the alleged purchaser, or if the purchaser is unknown, to so allege with the other necessary averments under such circumstances. If there has ever been a variance from these holdings, we are not aware of it.
The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
Dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
261 S.W. 1031, 97 Tex. Crim. 401, 1924 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loftin-v-state-texcrimapp-1924.