Landrum v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
The prosecution was by information, based uj>on a complaint which described the church as the “St. Paul Methodist Church,” but the building was described in the information, as the “St. Paul Church.” A motion was made by defendant to quash the information for variance, which the court overruled. Defendant pleaded former conviction, and the court, without submitting the plea to the j ury, of its own motion struck the same out.
1Opinion of the Court
HENDERSON, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of firing a pistol into a church, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $25, and he prosecutes this appeal. He made a motion to quash the information, on the ground that there was a variance between it and the complaint. The complaint described the house or church shot into as “St. Paul Methodist Church.” The information describes it as “St. Paul Church.” In our opinion, the motion to quash the information should have been sustained. “St. Paul Methodist Church” and “St. Paul Church” are two distinct names, and may be entirely different places. It…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Exon v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1894
3Cited by10 opinions
- Texas Farm Bureau Cotton Ass'n v. StovallTexas Supreme Court · 1923
- Anderson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1923
- American Brewing Ass'n v. WoodsTexas Commission of Appeals · 1919
- Mansur & Tebbetts Implement Co. v. PriceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900
- Hubb-Diggs Co. v. MitchellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.