Richardson v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the Court
DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.
Appellant filed an application for a continuance. The absent testimony was material. There was no diligence shown. The indictment was filed in the County Court on March 20, 1908. The application for continuance was not made until the 20th of January, 1909. The reason for the want of diligence is accounted for by the following state of facts set out in the application: It is alleged that the absent witness Mitchell was present at the time and place money was made up for the purchase of the whisky, if it was purchased. This occurred in front of G. H. King’s grocery…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Sommerlatte v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Wilkins v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1928
- Leonard v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Lenzen v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Swilley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1914