From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Counts v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Mar 22, 1922
91 Tex. Crim. 349 (Tex. Crim. App. 1922)

Opinion

No. 6775.

Decided March 22, 1922.

Intoxicating Liquors — Possession — Sale — Indictment.

The statute has so modified the law as to limit the offense of the possession of intoxicating liquor to the purpose of sale, and the indictment must so allege. Following Francis v. State, 90 Tex. Crim. 67, and other cases.

Appeal from the District Court of Young. Tried below before the Honorable H.F. Weldon.

Appeal from a conviction of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor; penalty, three and one-half years imprisonment in the penitentiary.

The opinion states the case.

Brown Graham and Thomas G. Binkley, for appellant.

R.G. Storey, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.


The conviction is for the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, and was had before the amendment of the statute denouncing that offense.

The statute so modified the law as to limit the offense to the possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale. The indictment, as drawn, does not contain this limitation and therefore will not support the conviction. See Francis v. State, 90 Tex.Crim. Rep.; 235 S.W. Rep. 580; and Ex parte Mitchum, No. 6772, not yet reported.

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

Reversed and dismissed.


Summaries of

Counts v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Mar 22, 1922
91 Tex. Crim. 349 (Tex. Crim. App. 1922)
Case details for

Counts v. State

Case Details

Full title:S.C. COUNTS v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Mar 22, 1922

Citations

91 Tex. Crim. 349 (Tex. Crim. App. 1922)
238 S.W. 1113

Citing Cases

State v. Zain

The Constitution so requires. . . . A bill of particulars is for the purpose of furnishing details omitted…

State v. Pendry

For example, the alibi defense as used in this State does not relieve the prosecution of proving beyond a…