Pierce v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Smith. The appellant was convicted upon an indictment for card playing. He appealed to this court, and entered into a recognizance as follows: “The State of Texas') In this ease the defendant comes and takes an appeal “ r. Ito tlie Supreme Court, and enters into recognizance as “ William C. Pierce.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Smith. The appellant was convicted upon an indictment for card playing. He appealed to this court, and entered into a recognizance as follows: “The State of Texas') In this ease the defendant comes and takes an appeal “ r. Ito tlie Supreme Court, and enters into recognizance as “ William C. Pierce. J follows, to wit: On this day came William C. Pierce, “Hardy Holman, John Warren, and Washington T. Horton, who acknowledged themselves to he indebted to the State of Texas in the sum of two “hundred dollars, to he levied of their respective 'goods and chattels, lands “and tenements,…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
It is insisted by the attorney general that the recognizance ■does not so describe as to identify the case in which it is given. If the recognizance were taken in a case, the record of which remained in a different court ■from that in which, in case of its forfeiture, the judgment upon it is to be taken, it would, perhaps, be necessary (hat it should recite the cause of its •caption. (Commonwealth v. Downey, 9 Mass. R., 520; 16 Id., 446.) But here all the proceedings in the case, except upon the appeal, remain of record in the court in which (.lie recognizance is taken, and in case of…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Horton v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1867