From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goodman v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Jun 9, 1915
177 S.W. 966 (Tex. Crim. App. 1915)

Opinion

No. 3592.

Decided June 9, 1915.

1. — Robbery — Indictment.

Where, upon trial of robbery, the indictment followed approved precedent, the same was sufficient.

2. — Same — Statement of Facts — Bills of Exception.

In the absence of a statement of facts and bills of exception, the indictment being sufficient, the judgment must be affirmed.

Appeal from the Criminal District Court of Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. W.L. Crawford, Jr.

Appeal from a conviction of robbery; penalty, ninety-nine years imprisonment in the penitentiary.

The opinion states the case.

No brief on file for appellant.

C.C. McDonald, Assistant Attorney General, for the State. — Green v. State, 66 Tex.Crim. Rep..


Appellant was convicted of robbery with firearms and his punishment assessed at ninety-nine years in the penitentiary.

The indictment was good and followed the statute and approved form. Green v. State, 66 Tex.Crim. Rep., 147 S.W. Rep., 593; Bell v. State, 176 S.W. Rep., recently decided.

There is no statement of facts, nor bills of exception that can be considered in the absence of a statement of facts. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Goodman v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Jun 9, 1915
177 S.W. 966 (Tex. Crim. App. 1915)
Case details for

Goodman v. the State

Case Details

Full title:R. GOODMAN v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Jun 9, 1915

Citations

177 S.W. 966 (Tex. Crim. App. 1915)
77 Tex. Crim. 146

Citing Cases

Hampe v. Versen

E. 388; Wines v. State Bank etc., 53 N.E. 389; Hogan v. Petersen, 59 P. 162. (3) (a) In a personal injury…

Bradley v. State

Robbery by firearms is not a separate offense, but the use or exhibition of a firearm or deadly weapon in the…