Rainbolt v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Rusk. Tried below before the Hon.- J. B. Williamson. The appellant was convicted of an aggravated assault, on an indictment for an assault with intent to murder. The appeal bond recited that now comes Rainbolt as principal, and two others “ as his securities, who each acknowledge himself to owe and be indebted to the State of Texas in the sum of five hundred dollars, to be levied of his respective goods,” etc.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Rusk. Tried below before the Hon.- J. B. Williamson. The appellant was convicted of an aggravated assault, on an indictment for an assault with intent to murder. The appeal bond recited that now comes Rainbolt as principal, and two others “ as his securities, who each acknowledge himself to owe and be indebted to the State of Texas in the sum of five hundred dollars, to be levied of his respective goods,” etc. The second head note sets forth the only allegation in the indictment, tending .to aver a present “ability .to commit a battery,” and indicates the objection insisted upon…
1Opinion of the CourtOgdeh, J.
The attorney general has filed a motion to dismiss this case for the want of a proper recognizance. The recognizance is not in compliance with the statute, but we think the parties would nevertheless be bound by it. The statute requires, or rather indicates, that the principal and securities should be separately bound, whereas the recognizance in this case is joint. And while it is believed to be the better practice to follow the statute in such eases, yet as we think the parties may be held responsible under their joint recognizance, we are not inclined to sustain the motion, to dismiss.
The…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State v. NickersonMontana Supreme Court · 1952
- White v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1891
- Mathena v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1884
- State v. NickersonMontana Supreme Court · 1952