Weir v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Weir v. State

122 S.W.2d 302, 135 Tex. Crim. 650, 1938 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 850

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Weir v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 139 Tex. Crim. 33 →

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided December 14, 1938·No. No. 20024.·Published

Opinion

Graves, Judge.

The appellant was convicted of perjury,, and his punishment assessed at two years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without statement of facts or bills of exception. The indictment appears regular, and all proceedings thereunder are proper.

It appears, however, that the trial was had on a plea of guilty before the trial court. The sentence, however, recites that the defendant was assessed a penalty of two years’ confinement in the penitentiary by the verdict of the jury. This portion of such sentence should be reformed to show that such penalty was assessed by the court, and after the sentence being thus reformed, this judgment is affirmed.

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

Graves, Judge.

The appellant was convicted of perjury,, and his punishment assessed at two years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without statement of facts or bills of exception. The indictment appears regular, and all proceedings thereunder are proper.

It appears, however, that the trial was had on a plea of guilty before the trial court. The sentence, however, recites that the defendant was assessed a penalty of two years’ confinement in the penitentiary by the verdict of the jury. This portion of such sentence should be reformed to show that such penalty was assessed by the court, and after the sentence being thus reformed, this judgment is affirmed.

Weir v. State, 122 S.W.2d 302, 135 Tex. Crim. 650, 1938 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 850 (Tex. 1938).

Pincite

122 S.W.2d 302 (Weir v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.