Reid v. State

289 S.W.2d 237, 163 Tex. Crim. 40, 1956 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 975
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided February 1, 1956·No. 27977·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinions

DICE, Judge.

The appellants were convicted of unlawfully possessing a narcotic drug and each assessed punishment of two years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

The record contains no recognizance or appeal bond and shows that the appellants have been enlarged pending the appeal.

The minutes of the court which appear in the transcript, suggesting that recognizances may have been entered into, are not sufficient. Bell v. State, 137 Tex. Cr. R. 128, 128 S.W. 2d 812 ; and Therrell v. State, 161 Tex. Cr. Rep. 617, 279 S.W. 2d 879.

In the absence of a recognizance or bond substantially in the form prescribed by Articles 817 and 818, Vernon’s Ann. C.C.P., and the record showing that appellants are not confined in jail, we are without jurisdiction to enter any order other than to dismiss the appeal. De Hart v. State, 117 Tex. Cr. R. 176, 36 S.W. 2d 168, and Jones v. State, 159 Tex. Cr. R. 314, 263 S.W. 2d 780.

The appeals are dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.

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

Reid v. State, 289 S.W.2d 237, 163 Tex. Crim. 40, 1956 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 975 (Tex. 1956).

289 S.W.2d 237 (Reid v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Layman v. State
384 S.W.2d 145 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1964)
Carter v. State
170 Tex. Crim. 123 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1960)
Rowland v. State
166 Tex. Crim. 118 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1958)
Choice v. State
298 S.W.2d 148 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1957)
Reid v. State
289 S.W.2d 237 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1956)
Anderson v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.
136 S.W.2d 741 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1940)