State v. Morris
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Mason. Tried below before the Hon. J. H. Everett. The indictment was quashed, it seems, because some important words therein were deemed illegible, by the District Judge. The original not coming into the hands of the reporters they cannot furnish a fae simile of handwriting, held sufficient; which was all the question really submitted to the appellate court.
1Opinion of the Court
Moore, Associate Justice.
On motion of appellee the *373indictment against him was quashed because, as he insists, it “ does not charge an offense in plain and intelligible words, but uses the unintelligible words, ‘neat cattle’ and ‘ the value.’ ”
To enable the court more certainly to perceive and appreciate the force and applicability of the objections, the original indictment was, by order of the court below, directed to be sent up with the transcript for our inspection. An examination which we are thus enabled to make of the indictment fully satisfies us that the objections to it are altogether…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Bailey v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1911
- Feeny v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1911
- Kennedy v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1894
- Malton v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1891
- Rogers v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1913
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.