Doyle v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Leaving out formal averments, the information alleged that the defendant in said State and county on the 10th day of March, A. D. 1911, not being a practicing physician or surgeon, and not alone for the purpose of extracting teeth, did unlawfully engage in the practice of dentistry for fee and reward, without first having complied with the law and obtained a license from a board of examiners duly appointed and authorized by the law to issue such license to practice dentistry…
Read the full summary
Leaving out formal averments, the information alleged that the defendant in said State and county on the 10th day of March, A. D. 1911, not being a practicing physician or surgeon, and not alone for the purpose of extracting teeth, did unlawfully engage in the practice of dentistry for fee and reward, without first having complied with the law and obtained a license from a board of examiners duly appointed and authorized by the law to issue such license to practice dentistry in the State of Texas, against the peace and dignity of the State. The testimony shows that defendant had no license.…
1Opinion of the Court
Appellant was prosecuted under information and complaint, charging him with practicing dentistry without license so to do. He was found guilty and his punishment assessed at a fine of $25.
There was no motion to quash the information, but in the record we find a motion in arrest of judgment, alleging the insufficiency of the information. However, from an inspection of the information, we think it sufficiently charges an offense prohibiting the practice of dentistry without having obtained a license.
While in the record there is an order granting leave to file an amended motion for a new trial,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hays v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1972
- Lowery v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1916
- Oliver v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
- Oliver v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985