Home/Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas/Pond v. State

Pond v. State

101 S.W.2d 247
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Pond v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 131 Tex. Crim. 559 →
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided January 20, 1937·No. No. 18724·Published

Opinion

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for possessing for the purpose of sale intoxicating liquor in dry area, punishment assessed being a fine of $100.

The indictment is fatally defective. It merely charged that appellant possessed whisky for the purpose of sale in Cherokee county, Tex., and that said county was “dry area.”

It has been held many times that such an averment is not sufficient to show that local option was in effect in the territory where the transaction is alleged to have occurred. See Whitmire v. State (Tex.Cr.App.) 94 S.W. (2d) 742; Schmidt v. State (Tex.Cr.App.) 94 S.W.(2d) 743; Coleman v. State (Tex.Cr.App.) 97 S.W.(2d) 701; Privitt v. State (Tex.Cr.App.) 98 S.W.(2d) 204; Clepper v. State (Tex.Cr.App.) 98 S.W. (2d) 207; Jones v. State (Tex.Cr.App.) 98 S.W.(2d) 208.

Judgment is reversed and prosecution ordered dismissed.

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

Pond v. State, 101 S.W.2d 247 (Tex. 1937).

101 S.W.2d 247 (Pond v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mrs. Oma Coleman v. State
97 S.W.2d 701 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1936)
Whitmire v. State
94 S.W.2d 742 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1936)
Schmidt v. State
94 S.W.2d 743 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1936)
Clepper v. State
98 S.W.2d 207 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1936)
Jones v. State
98 S.W.2d 208 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1936)
Privitt v. State
98 S.W.2d 204 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1936)