Cotton v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Travis. Tried below before the Hon. J. P. Richardson. The appellant was indicted for dealing “faro.” The case was made out by the State by the testimony of one Joe Hallum, who testified that when .he saw Cotton ex-Mbit “faro” Bob Roberts and John Ryan were not present.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Travis. Tried below before the Hon. J. P. Richardson. The appellant was indicted for dealing “faro.” The case was made out by the State by the testimony of one Joe Hallum, who testified that when .he saw Cotton ex-Mbit “faro” Bob Roberts and John Ryan were not present. Defendant’s counsel placed the district attorney on the stand, who testified that he drew the indictment from a memorandum furnished by the grand jury, and thatBob Roberts and John Ryan were the only witnesses whose names were furnished, and their names were indorsed on the indictment.
1Opinion of the Court
Roberts, Chief Justice.
The defense set up in this case was that the particular transaction charged in the indictment, and for which the grand jury intended to indict the defendant, was not that which was proved oil the *170trial. The court declined to recognize defendant’s right to institute an inquiry into the intention of the grand jury further than as expressed in the indictment found by them. This was correct, .as formerly held by this court. (Grain v. The State, 14 Tex., 634.) We find no error in the case.
Affirmed.
Affirmed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Crain v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1855
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. DaileyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1913
- Johnson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1886
- Hart v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1883