Weeks v. State

102 S.W.2d 223, 132 Tex. Crim. 32, 1937 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 94
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 17, 1937
DocketNo. 18520
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 102 S.W.2d 223 (Weeks 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
Weeks v. State, 102 S.W.2d 223, 132 Tex. Crim. 32, 1937 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 94 (Tex. 1937).

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Judge.

— Conviction for keeping an open saloon; punishment, a fine of $100.00.

The information in this case charges as follows; omitting formal parts: “Ruth Weeks did then and there operate and assist in operating an open saloon, and was then and there directly interested and indirectly interested in the operation of an open saloon.” Manifestly said information was bad. It wholly failed to charge any of those acts or things which enter into the definition of an open saloon. An informtion in exactly the same form was held bad in Weinberger v. State, 98 S. W. (2d) 356; Stewart v. State, 98 S. W. (2d) 357; Barrow v. State, 98 S. W. (2d) 358. Upon the authority of the above mentioned cases the information herein is wholly defective.

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

Reversed and prosecution ordered, dismissed.

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

Related

Spradling v. State
773 S.W.2d 553 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 S.W.2d 223, 132 Tex. Crim. 32, 1937 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weeks-v-state-texcrimapp-1937.