From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Munoz v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Mar 16, 1960
333 S.W.2d 148 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960)

Opinion


333 S.W.2d 148 (Tex.Crim.App. 1960) Catarina MUNOZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 31721. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. March 16, 1960

Webb, Schulz & Stokes, by Malcolm C. Schulz, Abilene, for appellant.

Bill Thomas, County Atty., Nelson Quinn, Asst. County Atty., Abilene, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Judge.

The conviction is under a multiple count information for sales of beer on May 12, May 13 and May 16, 1959, in a dry area, with punishment assessed at $650 fine on each count.

[169 Tex.Crim. 182] The complaint and information were filed May 21, 1959, which was before the effective date of Art. 408a, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., providing that not more than one misdemeanor offense may be charged or alleged in the same complaint, information or indictment.

Trial was on September 23, 1959, which was after Art. 408a, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., went into effect.

We need not here decide whether Art. 408a, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., applies to complaints, informations or indictments filed before its effective date.

If it did apply in appellant's case, no question was raised in the trial court concerning the information charging three separate offenses and the requirements of Art. 408a, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., were waived. Hill v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 332 S.W.2d 579.

The record contains no statement of facts or bills of exception, and no other contention of error is presented.

The judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

Munoz v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Mar 16, 1960
333 S.W.2d 148 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960)
Case details for

Munoz v. State

Case Details

Full title:Catarina MUNOZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Mar 16, 1960

Citations

333 S.W.2d 148 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960)

Citing Cases

Drake v. State

The court of appeals held that since appellant did not move to quash the indictment, the error was waived,…