Fry v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Defendant made a motion in arrest of judgment, which called in question the sufficiency of the indictment as to each and all of the assignments of perjury. This motion was overruled, and this ruling and action of the court is the main question involved on this appeal. All the essential matters pertaining to the motion in arrest are stated in the opinions. No further statement necessary.
1Opinion of the Court
HURT, Presiding Judge.
Appellant was convicted of perjury; hence this appeal. There are six distinct assignments in the indictment on which the perjury is predicated, as follows: (1) “It then and there became a material inquiry before the said grand jury, and necessary for ' the due administration of the criminal laws of said State, whether the said John Fry had seen any person bet or wager at a gaming table or bank, kept or exhibited for the purpose of gaming, in Jim Love’s room, in the town of Jacksonville, in the said county and State, within two-years before the said 11th day of December,…
2Cited by10 opinions
- McMurtry v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1898
- Manning v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1904
- Compton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Taylor v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1906
- Compton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1936
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.