Tidwell v. State

126 S.W. 1128, 58 Tex. Crim. 577, 1910 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 184
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 30, 1910
DocketNo. 497.
StatusPublished

This text of 126 S.W. 1128 (Tidwell v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tidwell v. State, 126 S.W. 1128, 58 Tex. Crim. 577, 1910 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 184 (Tex. 1910).

Opinions

The Assistant Attorney-General moves to dismiss the appeal because the recognizance is insufficient in that it does not state the amount of the punishment assessed against appellant. An inspection of the recognizance found in the record before this court sustains the motion of the Assistant Attorney-General and it shows on its face that the amount of the punishment assessed is not inserted in the recognizance. This is necessary under the statute as it now stands. See also May v. State, 40 Tex. Crim. 196.

The motion of the Assistant Attorney-General is sustained and the appeal is dismissed.

Dismissed.

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

Related

May v. State
49 S.W. 402 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
126 S.W. 1128, 58 Tex. Crim. 577, 1910 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tidwell-v-state-texcrimapp-1910.