From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hamilton v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Oct 30, 1912
68 Tex. Crim. 47 (Tex. Crim. App. 1912)

Opinion

No. 1874.

Decided October 30, 1912.

Recognizance — Appeal Bond.

Where, upon appeal from a conviction of a misdemeanor, the appellant entered into an appeal bond, after the adjournment of court instead of a recognizance during the term, the appeal must be dismissed.

Appeal from the District Court of Mason. Tried below before the Hon. Clarence Martin.

Appeal from a misdemeanor; penalty, a fine of $10.

The opinion states the case.

No brief on file for appellant.

C.E. Lane, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.


Appellant was charged with and convicted of a misdemeanor. He did not enter into a recognizance during the term, but attempts to perfect his appeal by entering into an appeal bond subsequent to the adjournment of court. This confers no jurisdiction on this court. (Art. 918, Code of Criminal Procedure; Herron v. State, 27 Tex. 337; Cook v. State, 8 Texas Crim. App., 671.)

The appeal is dismissed.

Dismissed.


Summaries of

Hamilton v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Oct 30, 1912
68 Tex. Crim. 47 (Tex. Crim. App. 1912)
Case details for

Hamilton v. the State

Case Details

Full title:F.N. HAMILTON v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Oct 30, 1912

Citations

68 Tex. Crim. 47 (Tex. Crim. App. 1912)
150 S.W. 775

Citing Cases

Welch v. the State

Palmer v. State, 63 Tex.Crim. Rep.; Bacon v. State, 10 Tex. 98; Herron v. State, 27 Tex. 337; Jones v. State,…

Knowlton and Dominguez v. the State

Under the statute and decisions the motion must be sustained. C.C.P., arts. 918 and 920; Wells v. State, 68…