Peterson & Fitch v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Grimes. Tried below before the Hon. M. Hart Davis. A former appeal having been dismissed in this court because the recognizance did not recite any offense known to the laws of the State, the defendants, by leave obtained from the District Court, gave a new recognizance there, nunc pro tuno, in proper form, and brought up this case on a new transcript.
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
The appellants were indicted at the Spring-term of the District Court of Grimes county for the year 1868. They were charged with selling intoxicating liquors, in quantities less than a quart, to one E. H. Giezel, without having first obtained license to sell. The defendants pleafi guilty to-the facts, but set up an answer in avoidance of the penalty. The court ruled the answer insufficient to bar the action, and the jury fixed the fine at $100.
We will say here that the indictment was void. The defendants should have been indicted as individuals, and not as a partnership firm. But they took…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Pueblo v. BarquetSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1913
- Grant v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1880
- People v. BarquetSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1913
- Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion, Texas Attorney General Reports1969