Legal Opinion

Adkins v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided February 28, 1900No. 2082PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The ease generally is sufficiently stated in the' opinion of the court. We make the following statement taken from the evidence:

1Opinion of the Court

DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

Appellant Vas convicted of forgery, and his punishment assessed at two years confinement in the penitentiary.

' The indictment contained four counts, charging forgery, uttering a forged instrument, and having in possession a forged instrument with intent to pass it. The court submitted the first count in his charge to the jury, omitting the remaining three. This was proper.

The instrument was set out according to its tenor, as follows:

“$11.75. Gainesville, Texas, June 8th, 1899.
“Ninety days after date, for value received, promise to pay to Ed Liedtke or order eleven…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Sylvester v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1981
  2. Chimene v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1937
  3. Covarrubias v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1960
  4. Richards v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API