Rozier v. State
This text of 234 S.W. 666 (Rozier 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.
Opinions
Conviction was for unlawfully transporting intoxicating liquor. Punishment one year in penitentiary.
There are no bills of exceptions in the record. Appellant’s motion to quash the indictment because our law is in conflict with the Federal law upon the subject of intoxicating liquor was properly overruled. Franklin v. State, 88 Texas Crim. Rep., 342, 230 S. W. Rep., 692; Ex parte Gilmore, 88 Texas Crim. Rep., 529, 228 S. W. Rep., 199.
Appellant urges in his motion for new trial that the evidence shows he was acting under duress in his connection with the whisky, and therefore this conviction should be set aside. We fail to discover any such duress as will excuse a party for violating the law. Art. 44, Vernon’s P. C.; Burton v. State, 51 Texas Crim. Rep., 201, 101 S. W. Rep., 226.
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
234 S.W. 666, 90 Tex. Crim. 337, 1921 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rozier-v-state-texcrimapp-1921.