Miller v. State

31 S.W.2d 634, 116 Tex. Crim. 303, 1930 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 751
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Miller v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 112 Tex. Crim. 125
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided June 25, 1930·No. No. 13527.·Published

Opinion

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for possessing intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale, punishment being two years in the penitentiary.

The state’s evidence makes out a complete case against appellant. His evidence.raised the issue that he did not have the whisky for sale but that he had recently bought it to be used as a beverage at a proposed party. The defensive issue was properly submitted and the jury has settled the question against appellant.

The only bill of exception complains because the district attorney said in' his argument, “I think his testimony was just as black a perjury as was ever committed.” The bill does not even state to whom the argument referred. Manifestly the bill presents no error.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Miller v. State, 31 S.W.2d 634, 116 Tex. Crim. 303, 1930 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 751 (Tex. 1930).

31 S.W.2d 634 (Miller v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.