Legal Opinion

Durham v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided February 2, 1927No. 10512PublishedCited by 24 opinions

The opinion states the case.

1Opinion of the Court

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for possessing intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale, punishment being one year in the penitentiary.

Only two witnesses testified, Johnson, the officer who arrested appellant, and Smith an admitted accomplice. The point is made that the accomplice witness was not sufficiently corroborated to permit the conviction to stand in view of Article 718 of our Code of Criminal Procedure (1925 Rev.) which positively denies a conviction “upon the testimony of an accomplice unless corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the offense…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Boone v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1921
  2. Gothard v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1925
  3. Welden v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1881

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. McInnis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1932
  2. Alexander v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1954
  3. Story v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1949
  4. Freeman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1931
  5. Otto v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1931

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API