Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

33 Tex. Crim. 539

28 S.W 200

Armento v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided October 17, 1894

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1894-10-17

Tried below before Hón. Frank E. Hunter, County Judge. Appellant was convicted in a Justice Court under a complaint charging him with an 'affray, and fined $5. He appealed to the County Court. A motion was made by the county attorney to dismiss his appeal: first, because defendant failed to make and file his motion for new trial in the lower court in the time prescribed by law; second, because the appeal bond misdescribes the judgment of the Justice Court.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 1909

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1894-10-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DAVIDSON, Judge.

¶1 On motion of tbe prosecution tbe appeal in tbis case from tbe Justice Court was dismissed in tbe County Court. Tbe recognizance for appeal to tbis court recites that appellant was convicted in tbe County Court. It should have recited tbe dismissal of bis appeal. There are two grounds in this character of ease which can attach tbe jurisdiction of tbe court on appeal: first, where the fine imposed in tbe County Court shall exceed $100 exclusive of cost; second, where tbe appeal from tbe Justice Court to tbe County Court has been dismissed in tbe latter court. These grounds are entirely distinct from each other. Tbe recognizance, to be valid, must recite one of said grounds, and it must set forth tbe true one, as manifested by tbe record. Tbe recognizance recites a conviction in tbe County Court, whereas in truth and in fact tbe record shows a dismissal of tbe appeal in the said court.

¶2 Tbe appeal is dismissed.

¶3 Dismissed.

Judges all present and concurring.
/33/texcrim/539 · .json · Public domain