Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

155 Tex. Crim. 101

Davis v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided April 26, 1950

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1950-04-26

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 1954

3 state decisions

Relies on Kees v. Canada Dry Ginger Ale · 151 Tex. Crim. 511 - Hodges v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1950-04-26

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DAVIDSON, Judge.

¶1Upon an information charging the unlawful possession of wine for the purpose of sale in Kaufman County, a dry area, appellant was convicted and punishment assessed at a fine of $250.

¶2The state was under the burden of establishing, either by proof or otherwise, that Kaufman County was a dry area within *102the meaning of the Liquor Control Act. The statement of facts, as well as the record as a whole, fails to reflect that the state discharged that burden.

¶3The evidence is therefore insufficient to sustain the conviction. Hodges v. State, 151 Tex. Cr. R. 511, 209 S. W. 2d 611; Brigham v. State, 154 Tex. Cr. R. 55, 225 S. W. 2d 176.

¶4The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

¶5Opinion approved by the court.

/155/texcrim/101 · .json · Public domain