Russell v. State

274 S.W. 145, 100 Tex. Crim. 654, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 621
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Russell v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 92 Tex. Crim. 93
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided April 15, 1925·No. No. 8871.·Published

Opinions

Appellant was convicted in the district court of Kaufman County of possessing mash for the purpose of *Page 655 manufacturing intoxicating liquor, and his punishment fixed at one year in the penitentiary.

The State moves to dismiss the appeal because of a defective recognizance. An examination of said recognizance shows that it recites that appellant was adjudged guilty of a felony and appealed from a conviction of a felony. There is no statement otherwise as to the offense for which conviction was had or from which an appeal was taken. This is insufficient. Art. 903 Vernon's C. C. P. The motion of the State will be sustained, and the appeal will be dismissed.

Dismissed.

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

Russell v. State, 274 S.W. 145, 100 Tex. Crim. 654, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 621 (Tex. 1925).

274 S.W. 145 (Russell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.