McGregor v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

McGregor v. State

156 S.W.2d 271, 143 Tex. Crim. 1, 1941 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 532

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedDecember 3, 1941

DocketNo. 21766

StatusPublished

This text of 156 S.W.2d 271 (McGregor 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.

Bluebook

McGregor v. State, 156 S.W.2d 271, 143 Tex. Crim. 1, 1941 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 532 (Tex. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant pleaded guilty in the district court of Haskell County on a charge of driving while intoxicated, and was assessed a penalty of ten days in jail and a fine of $50.00.

The record contains no statement of facts, but it is the contention that inasmuch as the law relative to driving on a public highway while intoxicated was changed by House Bill No. 73, Acts of the Forty-seventh Legislature, that the case should be reversed and ordered dismissed. Recently this matter has been considered in the case of R. C. Davis v. State, No. 21,699, (142 Texas Crim. Reports, 602) and Pete Houston v. State, No. 21,684, (Reported in this volume) (neither of which has been reported), and decided adversely to appellant’s contentoin.

[2]*2No other question is presented. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant pleaded guilty in the district court of Haskell County on a charge of driving while intoxicated, and was assessed a penalty of ten days in jail and a fine of $50.00.

The record contains no statement of facts, but it is the contention that inasmuch as the law relative to driving on a public highway while intoxicated was changed by House Bill No. 73, Acts of the Forty-seventh Legislature, that the case should be reversed and ordered dismissed. Recently this matter has been considered in the case of R. C. Davis v. State, No. 21,699, (142 Texas Crim. Reports, 602) and Pete Houston v. State, No. 21,684, (Reported in this volume) (neither of which has been reported), and decided adversely to appellant’s contentoin.

[2]*2No other question is presented. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 S.W.2d 271, 143 Tex. Crim. 1, 1941 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgregor-v-state-texcrimapp-1941.