Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

528 S.W.2d 843

Saunders v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided October 22, 1975

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1975-10-22

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently June 1988

5 state decisions

Relies on Wilson v. State · Mears v. State · Wirges v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1975-10-22

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 OPINION

ONION, Presiding Judge.

¶2 Appellant entered a plea of guilty before the court to the offense of knowingly and intentionally delivering marihuana. Punishment was assessed at three (3) years.

¶3 The indictment, omitting the formal parts, alleges that appellant on or about May 24, 1974, “then and there knowingly and intentionally delivered to John Hester marihuana; . . . ” Consequently, such indictment was drawn under the provisions of Sec. 4.05, Texas Controlled Substances Act (Art. 4476-15, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.Stat.). The indictment is fundamentally defective in that it fails to allege the amount of marihuana delivered or that the marihuana was delivered for remuneration, so as to reflect what punishment is involved, whether the offense is a misdemeanor or felony, or whether the district court has jurisdiction. Wilson v. State, 520 S.W.2d 377 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Mears v. State, 520 S.W.2d 380 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Wirges v. State, 521 S.W.2d 251 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Medrano v. State, 524 S.W.2d 719 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Tribble v. State, 525 S.W.2d 29 (Tex.Cr.App.1975).

¶4 The judgment is reversed and the prosecution is ordered dismissed.

DOUGLAS, J., not participating.
/528/sw2d/843 · .json · Public domain