Whitesides v. State

71 S.W. 969, 44 Tex. Crim. 410, 1903 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 15
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided January 28, 1903·No. No. 2542.·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

DAVIDSOH, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of unlawfully killing a cow, and fined $25.

When this cause was called for trial, the court quashed the information, and immediately permitted the prosecution to file new pleadings, over appellant’s objection. This action of the court was correct. The court then called on appellant to answer to the new information. Appellant asked for two days time in which to prepare his cause and file written pleadings, which was refused by the court, and exception taken. This exception was well taken. The filing of the new information made a new case, and appellant was entitled, after his arrest, to the two days in which to prepare his cause and file the written pleadings. White’s Ann. Code Crim. Proc., art. 567, sec. 577. After an examination of the other questions suggested for revision, we are of opinion the court’s rulings were correct. For the error indicated, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Whitesides v. State, 71 S.W. 969, 44 Tex. Crim. 410, 1903 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 15 (Tex. 1903).

71 S.W. 969 (Whitesides v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gonzales v. State
320 S.W.2d 679 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1959)
James v. State
21 S.W.2d 667 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1929)
Etheridge v. State
175 S.W. 702 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1915)
Bohannan v. State
1914 OK CR 124 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1914)
Graham v. State
161 S.W. 714 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1913)
Stephens v. State
147 S.W. 235 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1912)
Roberts v. State
143 S.W. 614 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1912)