State v. Lindenburg
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Bastrop. The defendant was indicted at the Fall Term, 1854, of the District Court of Bastrop county, for committing perjury upon the trial, at the Fall Term, 1853, of the same Court, of one Chancy Johnson for gaming. The defendant moved to quash the indictment on various grounds. His motion was sustained, and the State appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Bastrop. The defendant was indicted at the Fall Term, 1854, of the District Court of Bastrop county, for committing perjury upon the trial, at the Fall Term, 1853, of the same Court, of one Chancy Johnson for gaming. The defendant moved to quash the indictment on various grounds. His motion was sustained, and the State appealed. That part of the indictment which averred the materiality of the statement and its falsity was as follows : “ And the grand jurors “ aforesaid, on their oaths aforesaid, further present, upon the 46 trial of the said issue, so joined between the said State…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The defendant was indicted for perjury committed in giving testimony on a trial upon an indictment for betting at a certain gaming table. The defendant moved to quash the indictment, and his motion was sustained. Of the several causes assigned in support of the motion to quash, there is but one which seems to us at all deserving of notice; that is, that in the. assignment of the perjury, instead of simply averring the negative of the oath, the indictment, in this connection, also avers the knowledge of the defendant of the matter specially averred as the converse of the oath. Thus, it is…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Jones v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1915
- State v. PowellTexas Supreme Court · 1866
- Turner v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1892
- Allen v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- State v. MarvelNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1924
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.