Walker v. State
This text of 58 S.W.2d 80 (Walker 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.
Opinion
The offense is robbery; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of nine years.
The indictment is regular and properly presented.
The evidence heard in the trial court is not brought up for review.
A motion was made to quash the indictment because it names the appellant as Berl Walker, whereas his name is Beryle E. Walker. What evidence, if any, was heard on the motion is not discussed. Apparently, on its face, there appears no merit in the motion.
In the absence of the statement of facts, the merit of the motion for a continuance cannot be ascertained. The same is true with reference to the complaint of the charge of the court and the exceptions thereto. *151 Finding no error in the record, the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
58 S.W.2d 80, 123 Tex. Crim. 150, 1933 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-state-texcrimapp-1933.