Boortz v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
HAWKINS, Judge.
— Conviction is for manufacturing intoxicating liquor. Punishment, one year in the penitentiary.
Appellant sought to have the indictment quashed on many grounds set out in his motion. Without taking the time to state the various objections urged we think it sufficient to say all of the questions raised have been settled against his contentions. The general form of the indictment is practically the same as that upheld in Travino v. State, 92 Texas Crim. Rep., 140, 242 S. W. Rep., 242. Other contentions have been overruled in Ex parte Gilmore, 88 Texas Crim. Rep., 529, 228 S. W.…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Welchek v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1922
- Ex Parte GilmoreCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1920
- Stanchel v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1921
- Ex Parte MitchumCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1922
- Bronson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1910
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hayes v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1930
- Givens v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Goforth v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Rayburn v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1923
- Givens v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1925
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.