Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

480 S.W.2d 687

Perez v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1972-06-07

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently November 2016

2 state decisions

Relies on Mendoza v. State · Williams v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1972-06-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

¶2Appellants are charged with the offense of “operating] and assisting] in operating an open saloon” in violation of Article 666-3, Vernon’s Ann.P.C.

¶3*688After these prosecutions began, the Legislature amended Article 666-3, V.A.P.C., and deleted that portion of it which dealt with the open saloon. Williams and Liggins v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 476 S.W.2d 307. See Vernon’s General and Special Laws of Texas, Vol. 1, Ch. 65, Sec. 1 at 681. Consequently, there is no longer a basis for prosecution in the cases at bar. Williams and Liggins v. State, supra. Since the convictions are not final, they require reversal. Mendoza v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 460 S.W.2d 145. See also Article 14, V.A.P.C.

¶4The judgments are reversed and the causes are dismissed.

/480/sw2d/687 · .json · Public domain