Saulter v. State

242 S.W. 242, 92 Tex. Crim. 96, 1922 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 370
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 7, 1922
DocketNo. 6927.
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 242 S.W. 242 (Saulter 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.

Bluebook
Saulter v. State, 242 S.W. 242, 92 Tex. Crim. 96, 1922 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 370 (Tex. 1922).

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Judge.

— This conviction was for forgery in the District Court of Wichita County, with punishment of five years in the penitentiary affixed.

The indictment herein was returned by a grand jury which was selected according to neither method provided by Chapter 1, Title 7 of our Code of Criminal Procedure, but in apparent disregard of the plain direction of said statute^. A motion to quash based on said ground was overruled. The matter is fully discussed in Russell v. State, No. 6923 this day decided. For the reasons given in the Russell ease we are of opinion the trial court erred in overruling the motion to quash the indictment, and that same necessitates a reversal and dismissal of this case, and it is so ordered.

Dismissed.

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

Related

Warren v. State
79 S.W.2d 1092 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1935)
Powell v. State
269 S.W. 443 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1924)
Acuff v. State
244 S.W. 1117 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1922)
Robinson v. State
244 S.W. 599 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
242 S.W. 242, 92 Tex. Crim. 96, 1922 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 370, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saulter-v-state-texcrimapp-1922.