State v. Cocke
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Bexar. Tried below before the Hon. George H. Noonan. There is no occasion for a statement of the facts.
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
Had the appellees produced the body of their principal in accordance with the terms of their bond or recognizance, and no indictment had been found against him for the offense described in the recognizance, they certainly would not have been liable for the penalty; but this they did not do. .They were in default, and they cannot be heard upon any question touching the indictment. It is the nature of their undertaking that their principal shall appear, and they cannot be heard to say that he did not appear because there was no indictment found against him for the offense he was bound over to…
2Cited by5 opinions
- State v. Sureties of KrohneWyoming Supreme Court · 1893
- State v. AkeTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- United States v. DavenportDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 1920
- J. D. Martin v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1884
- Smalley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1877