Wells v. State

Decided October 30, 1912

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1912-10-30

Criminal Law (§ 1076*) — Appeal—Misdemeanor — Recognizance. Under the express provisions of Code Cr. Proe. 1911, art. 918, one convicted of a misdemeanor cad perfect an appeal only by entering into a recognizance during the term, and not by giving an appeal bond. [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2708-2716, 3201; Dec. Dig. § 1076.*]

Relies on Herron v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Dismissed · Decided 1912-10-30

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 1975

6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

HARPER, J.

¶1Appellant was indicted, charged with embezzlement in an amount in excess of $50 — a felony. When tried, he was convicted of embezzlement of an amount less than $50 — a misdemeanor.

¶2After adjournment of court, he attempts to perfect his appeal to this court by filing an appeal bond, not having entered into a recognizance during the term. Having been convicted of a misdemeanor only, the law does not authorize an appeal to be perfected by giving an appeal bond. Article 918, Code of Criminal Procedure; Herron v. State, 27 Tex. 337; Cook v. State, 8 Tex, App. 671. The motion of the Assistant Attorney General to dismiss the appeal is sustained.

¶3The appeal is dismissed.