Watson v. State
138 S.W. 611, 62 Tex. Crim. 620, 1911 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 350
Opinions
The recognizance is deficient in that it fails to state the amount of the punishment or its character. This omission from the recognizance renders it fatally defective, and requires a dismissal of the appeal. The appeal is dismissed.
Dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Watson v. State, 138 S.W. 611, 62 Tex. Crim. 620, 1911 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 350 (Tex. 1911).
138 S.W. 611 (Watson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Rhea v. State
275 S.W. 1021 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1925)
Ex Parte Cochrain
243 S.W. 455 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1922)
Godby v. State
227 S.W. 192 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1920)
Young v. State
222 S.W. 1103 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1920)
Willoughby v. State
219 S.W. 468 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1919)
Goss v. State
202 S.W. 956 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1918)
Joseph v. State
204 S.W. 320 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1918)
Stubblefield v. State
200 S.W. 1090 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1918)