State v. Wren

Texas Supreme Court

State v. Wren

21 Tex. 379

DecidedJuly 1, 1858

StatusPublished

This text of 21 Tex. 379 (State v. Wren) 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

State v. Wren, 21 Tex. 379 (Tex. 1858).

Pincite

Opinion

Hemphill, C. J.

We are of opinion that there was no error in the judgment.

The Sheriff’s power in taking recognizances, bail bonds, &c., is regulated by Statute, and no authority was given him (prior to the adoption of the Code,) to take a bail bond under the facts as presented in this case. He had such authority when the defendant was, in default of bail, committed by a Justice of the Peace, (Art. 1706) or when executing a capias in a bailable case in vacation. (Dig. 2889.) But no such power in case of surrender into custody of the defendant by his bail, and it is therefore ordered that the judgment be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Hemphill, C. J.

We are of opinion that there was no error in the judgment.

The Sheriff’s power in taking recognizances, bail bonds, &c., is regulated by Statute, and no authority was given him (prior to the adoption of the Code,) to take a bail bond under the facts as presented in this case. He had such authority when the defendant was, in default of bail, committed by a Justice of the Peace, (Art. 1706) or when executing a capias in a bailable case in vacation. (Dig. 2889.) But no such power in case of surrender into custody of the defendant by his bail, and it is therefore ordered that the judgment be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 Tex. 379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wren-tex-1858.