Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

247 S.W. 282

Laminack v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided January 17, 1923

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1923-01-17

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1924

1 state decisions

Relies on 92 Tex. Crim. 342 - Bell v. State · 92 Tex. Crim. 46 - Stringer v. State · 91 Tex. Crim. 402 - McNeil v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1923-01-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

HAWKINS, J.

¶1Conviction is for manufacturing liquor.-' Punishment, one year in the penitentiary.

¶2The indictment alleges, and the proof shows, that the alleged offense was committed on November 10, 1921. This was before the amended act of the 37th Legislature, c. 61, p. 233, 1st C. S. (Vernon’s Ann. Pen. Code Supp. 1922, art. 588¾ et seq.), went into effect, and this prosecution therefore was controlled by the law passed at 2d O. S. 36th Legislature (article 588¼. et seq.). In order to charge an offense under that law, it was necessary to negative the exceptions. The indictment in the present case fails to do so. McNeil v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 239 S. W. 954; Stringer v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 241 S. W. 159; Bell v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 243 S. W. 1095.

¶3No offense being charged, the judgment must be reversed, and dismissal of the prosecution under the present indictment ordered.

/247/sw/282 · .json · Public domain