363 SW2D 781 - Ex Parte Drake

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently September 1985

4 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.

¶1On Motion for Rehearing

MORRISON, Judge.

¶2Appellant urges that we discuss his contention that the indictment which was introduced at the hearing alleged no date on .which the offense, with which he was charged having committed in the State of Alabama, occurred. The indictment reads in part as follows:

“Circuit Court of Montgomery County, November Term A.D. 1961.

“The Grand Jury of said County charge that, before the finding of this indictment, Guy Drake … did *

¶3Were we writing on a clean sheet, we might be inclined to agree with appellant’s contention, but we find that this Court has held in Pearce v. State, 32 Tex.Cr.R. 301, 23 S.W. 15, that an indictment from the same State containing the same allegation as to when the offense was committed was sufficient to authorize extradition. Ex parte Strom, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 130, 324 S.W. 2d 224, we said:

“We hold that the complaint substantially charges appellants with the crime of robbery in the State of California and that the question of its sufficiency as a criminal pleading is one to be determined by the courts of that State.”

¶4See also Ex parte Woodland, 146 Tex.Cr.R. 616, 177 S.W.2d 62, and Annot., 46 A.L.R. 2d, pp. 1151, 1159.

¶5Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.