Orange v. State

276 S.W. 710, 101 Tex. Crim. 595, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 936
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 10, 1925
DocketNo. 9160.
StatusPublished

This text of 276 S.W. 710 (Orange 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
Orange v. State, 276 S.W. 710, 101 Tex. Crim. 595, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 936 (Tex. 1925).

Opinions

The offense is the unlawful possession of equipment for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

The recognizance recites that the appellant was convicted of the offense of "possessing a still." It does not state whether it was a still for manufacturing intoxicating liquor or for what purpose it was used. A recognizance, to give jurisdiction to this court where the accused is released, is required by statute to describe the offense. See Art. 903, C. C. P. Unless the offense is described in the recognizance, the appeal must be dismissed. See Hardin v. State, 36 Tex.Crim. Rep.; McKey v. State, 87 Tex.Crim. Rep.; Singleton v. State, 87 Tex. Crim. 302; and other cases collated in Vernon's Tex.Crim. Stat., Vol. 2, 1922 Supplement, p. 2628.

Upon the motion of the State, the appeal is dismissed.

Dismissed.

ON MOTION TO REINSTATE.

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

Related

Singleton v. State
221 S.W. 610 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
276 S.W. 710, 101 Tex. Crim. 595, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 936, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/orange-v-state-texcrimapp-1925.