Monckton v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Monckton v. State

241 S.W. 1020, 92 Tex. Crim. 236, 1922 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 409

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 26, 1922

DocketNo. 6914.

StatusPublished

This text of 241 S.W. 1020 (Monckton 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

Monckton v. State, 241 S.W. 1020, 92 Tex. Crim. 236, 1922 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 409 (Tex. 1922).

Pincite

Opinions

LATTIMORE, Judge.

— Appellant was convicted in the Criminal District Court of Dallas County of the offense of forgery, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

The record is before us without any statement of facts or bills of exception. We have examined the indictment and the charge of the court and each appears to be in due and regular form. No error appearing in this case, the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

LATTIMORE, Judge.

— Appellant was convicted in the Criminal District Court of Dallas County of the offense of forgery, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

The record is before us without any statement of facts or bills of exception. We have examined the indictment and the charge of the court and each appears to be in due and regular form. No error appearing in this case, the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 S.W. 1020, 92 Tex. Crim. 236, 1922 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/monckton-v-state-texcrimapp-1922.