Home/Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas/Thompson v. State

Thompson v. State

234 S.W. 406, 90 Tex. Crim. 125, 1921 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 33
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided October 5, 1921·No. No. 6227.·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinions

The appeal is from a conviction of robbery. The motion to dismiss the appeal for want of sufficient recognizance must be sustained. The purported recognizance found in the record partakes more of the nature of an appearance bond or a recognizance guaranteeing the appearance of the accused in the trial court. It is faulty in several respects, particularly in its failure to observe the requirements of the statute that it shall bind the appellant and his sureties to "abide a judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals of the State of Texas." See Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 903. See opinion in cause No. 6229. Thompson v. State, 90 Tex.Crim. Rep., 234 S.W. Rep., 400.

The appeal is dismissed.

Dismissed.

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

Thompson v. State, 234 S.W. 406, 90 Tex. Crim. 125, 1921 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 33 (Tex. 1921).

234 S.W. 406 (Thompson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Robert J. Simon v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2006
Simon v. State
203 S.W.3d 581 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Jones v. State
352 S.W.2d 270 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1961)
Patrick v. State
299 S.W.2d 302 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1957)
Howell v. State
224 S.W.2d 228 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1949)
Bledsoe v. State
210 S.W.2d 165 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1948)
Gary v. State
201 S.W.2d 820 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1947)
Arguijo v. State
154 S.W.2d 656 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1941)
Penn v. State
31 S.W.2d 434 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1930)