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

Russell v. State

45 S.W.2d 622, 119 Tex. Crim. 469, 1931 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 175
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided June 10, 1931·No. No. 14292·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinions

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is murder; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for three years.

It appears that appellant entered into recognizance on appeal. A copy of the recognizance has not been brought forward in the transcript. Hence we are unable to determine whether the recognizance under which appellant is enlarged meets the requirements of the statute. Where the [471]*471appellant is enlarged, this court is without jurisdiction in the absence of a proper recognizance or appeal bond.

Appellant is granted fifteen days in which to perfect the record.

The appeal is dismissed.

Dismissed.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

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

Russell v. State, 45 S.W.2d 622, 119 Tex. Crim. 469, 1931 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 175 (Tex. 1931).

45 S.W.2d 622 (Russell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. State
5 S.W.3d 673 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1999)
Werner v. State
711 S.W.2d 639 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1986)
Turcola v. State
643 S.W.2d 164 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1982)
Brooks v. State
475 S.W.2d 268 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1972)
Childers v. State
202 S.W.2d 930 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1947)
State v. Vasquez
121 P.2d 903 (Utah Supreme Court, 1942)
Chance v. State
68 S.W.2d 212 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1933)
Boyd v. State
56 S.W.2d 651 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1932)
Chandler v. State
54 S.W.2d 100 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1932)
Howard v. State
55 S.W.2d 1048 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1932)