Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

13 Tex. Ct. App. 560

Houston v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided March 17, 1883

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 1883-03-17

Error from the County Court of Gonzales. Tried below before the Hon J. S. Conway, County Judge. The error in this case was prosecuted from the forfeiture of the appearance bond of John G. Hester, bailed under a charge of the theft of sheep under twenty dollars in value. The amount of the bond and judgment was two hundred dollars. The opinion sufficiently discloses the case.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently August 2002

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1883-03-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Willson, J.

¶1In accordance with the opinion of this court in Hart v. The State, this day rendered, ante, page 555, the motion of the assistant Attorney General to dismiss the writ of error in this case is overruled.

¶2A proceeding upon a forfeited bail bond is, in effect, a suit upon the bond, in which the scire facias serves the purpose of both a petition and a citation. Its foundation is the bond and the judicial declaration of the forfeiture of the bond, which is the judgment nisi. To entitle the State to a judgment final, it must prove the cause of action as in a civil suit. This proof is made by, first, the bond, and, second, the judgment nisi declaring its forfeiture.

¶3In this case the judgment nisi was not introduced in evidence, and therefore the proof is insufficient to support the judgment final; and for this reason the judgment must be reversed.

¶4*561None of the other assignments of error are, in our opinion, well taken. The judgment is reversed and cause remanded.

¶5Reversed and remanded.

¶6Opinion delivered March 17, 1883.

/13/texctapp/560 · .json · Public domain