Vaughan v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Jefferson. The case was tried before Hon. James M. Maxcv, one of the district judges, The question arose upon the insufficiency of service of the scire facias. The return read, * * * “ and executed by delivering to defendants, J. W. Patridge and A. M. Vaughan, a certified copy of this writ.” The judgment was by default. The judgment nisi was against the defendant, William Cribbs, and his sureties.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jefferson. The case was tried before Hon. James M. Maxcv, one of the district judges, The question arose upon the insufficiency of service of the scire facias. The return read, * * * “ and executed by delivering to defendants, J. W. Patridge and A. M. Vaughan, a certified copy of this writ.” The judgment was by default. The judgment nisi was against the defendant, William Cribbs, and his sureties. The final judgment was against Vaughan and Patridge, the sureties alone. Cribbs was not served with a scire facias. Vaughan and Patridge appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtDonley, J.
It is assigned for error, that there was no legal service on the defendants, Vaughan and Patridge, and that the court erred in rendering judgment in the absence of such notice.
The objection to the service it is believed is well founded. Article 412, Code of Criminal Procedure, requires that “ Sureties (on a forfeited bond or recognizance) shall be entitled to notice by service of a citation, the length of time, and in the manner required in civil actions. And if any surety fail to appear after such notice, and show sufficient cause for the non-attendance of the defendant, the judgment against…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Fulton v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1883
- Johnson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1961
- Johnson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1961
- Johnson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1961