Searcy v. State

4 Tex. 225
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 15, 1849
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 4 Tex. 225 (Searcy v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Searcy v. State, 4 Tex. 225 (Tex. 1849).

Opinion

Wheeler, J.

Without entering upon a particular examination of all the errors assigned, it is clear that the judgment in this case cannot he maintained.

There is no venue laid in the indictment to the facts charged as constituting the offense. And this is a fatal defect, for which the indictment ought to have been quashed or the judgment arrested on the motion of the defendant. At common law, says Mr. Chitty, (1 Chit. Or. L., 177,) the venue should always he laid in the county where the offense is committed. And it does not lie on the prisoner to disprove the commission of the offense in the county in which it is laid, but it is an essential ingredient in the evidence on the part of the prosecutor to prove that it was committed within it.

At the common law the venue was always regarded as a matter of substance; and hence, where the offense was committed in one county and consummated in another, the venue could be laid in neither, and the offender went unpunished. (Ib.) But in the present case the offense is not alleged to have been committed in any county; and we have no statute dispensing with the necessity of that averment.

Judgment reversed.

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

Related

Hirshfield v. Davis
43 Tex. 155 (Texas Supreme Court, 1875)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Tex. 225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/searcy-v-state-tex-1849.