Lopez v. State

212 S.W. 954, 85 Tex. Crim. 402, 1919 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 236
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided June 4, 1919·No. No. 5196.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Judge.

This is an appeal from a felony conviction in the District Court of the Thirty-fourth District of El Paso County.

*403 Tlie Assistant Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal because of a defective recognizance. The recognizance does not bind the appellant to abide by the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. Lindsey v. State, 59 Texas Crim. Rep., 273. Nor does the same show the court in which the accused was tried. Hughes v. State, 62 Texas Crim. Rep., 288. Nor does said recognizance follow the form prescribed by our statutes. See Art. 903, C. C. P.; Black v. State, 68 Texas Crim. Rep., 151, 151 S. W. Rep., 1053.

The motion of the Assistant Attorney General will be sustained, and the appeal dismissed.

Dismissed.

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

Lopez v. State, 212 S.W. 954, 85 Tex. Crim. 402, 1919 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 236 (Tex. 1919).

212 S.W. 954 (Lopez v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Staten v. State
246 S.W. 387 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1922)