Parrish v. State

We are not able to bring ourselves into accord with the postion taken by the State, in its persuasive motion for rehearing wherein it is urged that we were in error in concluding that the 1925 C. C. P. having re-enacted the suspended sentence law of 1913, after same had been construed in Martin v. State, 82 Tex.Crim. Rep., — this in legal effect adopted as part of said amended act, the construction thereof referred to.

We have examined with interest the general repealing clause appended to said 1925 C. C. P., wherein it is said: "This act shall be construed to be an independent act of the…