Grissom v. State

On Motion for Rehearing.

HAWKINS, J.

In his motion for rehearing, appellant insists that our original, opinion is in conflict with Seales v. State, 46 Tex. Cr. R. 296, 81 S. W. 947, 66 L. R. A. 730, 108 Am. St. Rep. 1014, and Lemly v. State, 107 Tex. Cr. R. 67, 294 S. W. 856. Whether or not an indictment such as is found in this case is duplicitous largely depends upon whether the offense charged is a continuous one. Because the statute declares that each day may be- a separate offense is not. necessarily the controlling factor. If the state desired to secure convictions for more than one…