McCuin v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
The alleged judgment was as follows: “The State of Texas v. Jack McCuin, No. 8065, Sept. 24, 1919. This day, this cause, was called for trial, and the State appeared by her district attorney, and defendant Jack McCuin appeared in person, his counsel also being present, and both parties announced ready for trial, and the defendant, Jack McCuin, in open court pleaded not guilty to the charge contained in the indictment herein; thereupon a jury, to-wit, Douglas Guantt, and…
Read the full summary
The alleged judgment was as follows: “The State of Texas v. Jack McCuin, No. 8065, Sept. 24, 1919. This day, this cause, was called for trial, and the State appeared by her district attorney, and defendant Jack McCuin appeared in person, his counsel also being present, and both parties announced ready for trial, and the defendant, Jack McCuin, in open court pleaded not guilty to the charge contained in the indictment herein; thereupon a jury, to-wit, Douglas Guantt, and eleven others, was duly selected, impaneled and sworn, who having heard the indictment read, and the defendant’s plea of not…
1Opinion of the Court
LATTIMORE, Judge.
—Appellant was convicted in the District Court of Henderson County, of theft of cattle, and his punishment fixed at two years in the penitentiary.
We are met at the threshold of this case with a motion made, by our Assistant Attorney General to dismiss the appeal, because there appears in the record no final judgment. We are of the opinion that the position taken by the State in this matter is correct. Article 853, of our Code of Criminal Procedure, sets out in detail the matters necessary to constitute a final judgment in a criminal case. By comparison of the judgment…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Savant v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1976
- Walling v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1921