State v. Durst
7 Tex. 74
Opinion
It will suffice for the disposition of this case to observe, that it is a positive requirement of the Constitution that the indictment conclude, “against the peace and dignity of the State.” (Hart. Dig., p. 62, sec. 9.)- lb is scarcely necessary to say that the courts have no authority to dispense with, that which the Constitution requires. .
The court did not err in its judgment quashing the indictment, and it is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Durst, 7 Tex. 74 (Tex. 1851).
7 Tex. 74 (State v. Durst) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Brasfield v. State
600 S.W.2d 288 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1980)
Ex Parte Meyer
207 S.W. 100 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1918)
Strauss v. State
173 S.W. 663 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1915)
Chemgas v. Tynan
51 Colo. 35 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1911)
State v. Campbell
109 S.W. 706 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1908)
Wade v. State
108 S.W. 677 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1908)
King, McRae & Co. v. G. B. Robinson & Bro.
2 Wilson 493 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1885)
Saine v. State
14 Tex. Ct. App. 144 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1883)
Cox v. State
8 Tex. Ct. App. 254 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1880)
Holden v. State
1 Tex. Ct. App. 225 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1876)
State v. Sims
43 Tex. 521 (Texas Supreme Court, 1875)
Williams v. State
27 Wis. 402 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1871)