Thetford v. State

169 S.W. 1153, 74 Tex. Crim. 649, 1914 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 390
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided October 14, 1914·No. Nos. 3237, 3238 and 3239.·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

PBEHDERGAST, Presiding Judge.

These three cases are by the same appellants and present exactly the same question. The judgment appealed from in each case is a final judgment on a forfeited bail bond.

Our statute expressly provides that such cases shall be placed on the civil docket and the proceedings shall be governed by the same rules governing other civil actions.

Our law requires an appellant in such case to file a brief in the lower court and this court as in civil actions. Ho brief is filed in this case and there is no indication that one has ever been filed in the lower court. Therefore,- upon the motion of the Assistant Attorney General each of said cases is hereby ordered dismissed. Lewis v. State, 38 S. W. Rep., 205; Sparks v. State, 47 S. W. Rep., 976; Mack v. State, 57 S. W. Rep., 811; Bringhurst v. State, 37 S. W. Rep., 757; Conrad v. State, 9 Texas Crim. App., 674. It is needless to cite other authorities.

Dismissed.

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

Thetford v. State, 169 S.W. 1153, 74 Tex. Crim. 649, 1914 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 390 (Tex. 1914).

169 S.W. 1153 (Thetford v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Walker v. State
272 S.W. 462 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1925)
Grammer v. State
230 S.W. 165 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1921)
Swim v. State
218 S.W. 761 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1920)
Rudy v. State
191 S.W.2d 698 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1916)