Brown v. State

In his motion for permission to file a second motion for rehearing, appellant reiterates the matters heretofore reviewed and advances the additional theory that the indictment offends against the rule against repugnancy in that it alleges that the appellant was the keeper of a gambling house, and also that he permitted the house kept to be used for the purpose of gaming, and that these are separate offenses denounced by article 559, P. C. An indictment is said to be “repugnant” when in the same count it contains allegations inconsistent with each other, both of which cannot be true and there…