Legal Opinion

Marshall v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided November 19, 1902No. 2555PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Ho statement necessary.

1Opinion of the Court

DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the justice court, and prosecuted his appeal to the criminal district court. Motion" was made by the district attorney to dismiss the appeal, because the bond was not in compliance with the statute. The statute requires the party prosecuting such appeal to enter into bond conditioned, among other things, that he will make his personal appearance before the “next term” of the court to which he prosecutes his appeal. The bond executed was conditioned that he make his personal’appearance “at the present regular term,” instead of “at the next…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Parroccini v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1921
  2. Basquez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1909
  3. Golden v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
  4. Staten v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1911
  5. Walker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API