Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

41 Tex. Crim. 635

57 S.W 847

Clark v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided April 11, 1900

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1900-04-11

<p>Recognizance on Appeal.</p> <p>Where the penalty assessed in a misdemeanor conviction is both a fine and imprisonment, the recognizance is fatally defective which states the punishment as a fine, omitting the imprisonment. The statute requires that the punishment as. assessed" by the jury must be stated in the recognizance.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently December 1960

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1900-04-11

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

¶1 Appellant was convicted in the county court of theft, and his punishment assessed at ten days confinement in the county jail and a fine of $25. Motion is made by the Assistant Attorney-General to dismiss the appeal because the recognizance fails to state the punishment as required by the statute. The recognizance states the punishment to be a fine of $25, omitting the ten days imprisonment in the ocunty jail. The statute requires that the punishment assessed by the jury shall he stated in the recognizance, and, as this has not been done, that instrument is fatally defective, and the motion to dismiss the appeal is sustained. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

¶2 Dismissed.

¶3 Henderson, Judge, absent.

/41/texcrim/635 · .json · Public domain