From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Feb 1, 1956
286 S.W.2d 422 (Tex. Crim. App. 1956)

Opinion

No. 28012.

February 1, 1956.

Appeal from the County Court, Smith County, Ned Price, J.

E. G. Pharr, Lubbock, for appellant.

Harry Loftis, Dist. Atty., Tyler, Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.


By Sec. 4, of Art. 93b, Vernon's R.C.S., it is made unlawful for any person to sell any agricultural seed having a false labeling.

This is a conviction under that statute, with punishment fixed at a fine of $5. The prosecution arose and was commenced in the county court.

The information charges only that the appellant `did then and there unlawfully sell agricultural seed that were falsely labeled.' There is no allegation as to whom the sale was made.

Art. 406, C.C.P., provides that `To charge an unlawful sale, it is necessary to name the purchaser.'

In Keeton v. State, 159 Tex.Crim. R., 264 S.W.2d 737, we held it necessary that in order to charge the offense of unlawfully selling whisky in a dry area the information must allege the name of the purchaser, if known, and, if unknown, that fact should be alleged. See, also, Hoover v. State, 97 Tex.Crim. 91, 259 S.W. 1088.

The information in this case being fatally defective for failing to name the purchaser, the judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.


Summaries of

King v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Feb 1, 1956
286 S.W.2d 422 (Tex. Crim. App. 1956)
Case details for

King v. State

Case Details

Full title:Harold KING, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Feb 1, 1956

Citations

286 S.W.2d 422 (Tex. Crim. App. 1956)
162 Tex. Crim. 453