Payne v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Ellis. The case was tried before Hon. B. W. Scott, one of the district judges. The defendant was convicted of retailing liquors in quantities less than one quart, without having obtained a license therefor. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 2075, Bote 654.) He appealed, entered into a recognizance, which is sufficiently described in the opinion. It did not set forth the offense, as required by the third division of article 263 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ellis. The case was tried before Hon. B. W. Scott, one of the district judges. The defendant was convicted of retailing liquors in quantities less than one quart, without having obtained a license therefor. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 2075, Bote 654.) He appealed, entered into a recognizance, which is sufficiently described in the opinion. It did not set forth the offense, as required by the third division of article 263 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 2731, Bote 708.) The case turned upon the sufficiency of the bond with this omission.
1Opinion of the CourtMorrill, C. J.
Before this court can entertain jurisdiction of a criminal or quasi criminal cause, three things must be apparent from the record: First, a final judgment in the district court; second, a motion for a new trial overruled and notice of an appeal; third, a recognizance that the defendant appear before the district court, &c.
’ In this case the two first requisites are deemed sufficient, but it is objected that the defendant has not complied with the third, by entering into the required recognizance. 0
*398The purported recognizance is as follows: “ Whereupon the said John W. Payne, as principal, and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Smith v. DunlavyTexas Supreme Court · 1869
- Buie v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1876