From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wood v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Oct 20, 1937
109 S.W.2d 756 (Tex. Crim. App. 1937)

Opinion

No. 18976.

Delivered October 20, 1937.

Intoxicating Liquor — Information.

Information charging violation of the provisions of Liquor Control Act, held not insufficient because information does not negative the exceptions in the statute.

Appeal from the District Court of Mason County. Hon. Lamar Thaxton, Judge.

Appeal from conviction for violating the Texas Liquor Control Act; penalty, fine of $100.

Affirmed.

The opinion states the case.

Glenn Capps and Roscoe Runge, both of Mason, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Attorney, of Austin, for the State.


Conviction for violating the provisions of the Texas Liquor Control Act; punishment, a fine of $100.00.

The complaints of the insufficience of the information because same does not negative the exceptions in the statute, and of the refusal of the trial court to instruct the jury regarding the matter of the inspectors being accomplice witnesses, — which seem to be the only material questions raised, — are both decided against appellant in the case of Baker v. State, 106 S.W.2d 308, in regard to first question raised, and as to the other, Stevens v. State, No. 18823, opinion handed down October 13, 1937 (page 333 of this volume).

Finding no error in the record, the judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Wood v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Oct 20, 1937
109 S.W.2d 756 (Tex. Crim. App. 1937)
Case details for

Wood v. State

Case Details

Full title:JIM BECK WOOD v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Oct 20, 1937

Citations

109 S.W.2d 756 (Tex. Crim. App. 1937)
133 Tex. Crim. 176

Citing Cases

Thomas v. State

For the first time in his motion for rehearing appellant urges that the State's pleading is bad for not…

Hebert v. State

It is urged that because the State failed to make any proof of these negative averments the State's case…