Legal Opinion

Fite v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided March 28, 1896No. 1034PublishedCited by 9 opinions

No statement necessary.

1Opinion of the Court

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of forgery; hence, this appeal. Appellant was charged with forging an instrument purporting to he a contract between “The L. B. Price Co.” and “Andrew Arlow, in regard to an album. It is alleged that the instrument purports to be the act of “Mr. Andrew Arlow.” The tenor clause of the indictment sets out the instrument or contract in ha3c verba, as having been signed by L. B. Price & Co. and Andrew Arlow. There is a direct conflict between the tenor and purport clauses of the indictment. The purport clause alleges the act to be the act of Andrew Arlow,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Campbell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1895

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. McGee and Fuller v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1898
  2. Price v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1896
  3. Taylor v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1906
  4. Thulemeyer v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1897
  5. Lon, Alias Ike Crayton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1903

4 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