From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

James v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Feb 15, 1911
134 S.W. 699 (Tex. Crim. App. 1911)

Opinion

No. 947.

Decided February 15, 1911.

Sodomy — Indictment.

Where, upon trial of sodomy, the indictment followed approved precedent the same was sufficient. Following Lewis v. State, 36 Tex. Crim. 37.

Appeal from the Criminal District Court of Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. Ed Sewell.

Appeal from a conviction of sodomy; penalty, ten years imprisonment in the penitentiary.

The opinion states the case.

No brief on file for appellant.

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


Appellant was convicted of sodomy, his punishment being assessed at ten years confinement in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. There was a motion made to quash the indictment upon what might be termed a general demurrer, in that it alleges there is no violation of the law charged. Under the authority of Lewis v. State, 36 Tex.Crim. Rep., we are of opinion the indictment is sufficient. The indictment charges in this case, as it did in the Lewis case, supra, that the offense was committed by copulation with a woman, in that he penetrated her fundament or anus with his private parts.

The only ground of the motion for a new trial is that the verdict and judgment are contrary to the law and evidence. The statement of facts not being before us, we will presume that the facts were sufficient.

There being no error the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

James v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Feb 15, 1911
134 S.W. 699 (Tex. Crim. App. 1911)
Case details for

James v. the State

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW JAMES v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Feb 15, 1911

Citations

134 S.W. 699 (Tex. Crim. App. 1911)
61 Tex. Crim. 232

Citing Cases

Cavanar v. State

In Moore's case 7 Texas Crim. App. 14, the principle is announced that the presumption in favor of the ruling…

Brown v. State

Appellant moved to quash the indictment, contending that the count which was submitted to the jury failed to…