From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Yates v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Mar 24, 1897
39 S.W. 933 (Tex. Crim. App. 1897)

Opinion

No. 1152.

Decided March 24th, 1897.

Judgment — Swearing of Jury.

A judgment which fails to show that the jury were selected, empaneled and sworn, is not a valid judgment. Code Crim. Proc., Art. 881, Subdiv. 4.

APPEAL from the County Court of Stonewall. Tried below before Hon J.W. KELLEY, County Judge.

Appeal from a conviction for failing to work a public road; penalty, a fine of $1.

No statement necessary.

Leggett Cunningham, for appellant, cited Cannon v. State, 5 Tex.Crim. App., 34; Howard v. State, 8 Tex.Crim. App., 613; Berry v. State, 10 Tex.Crim. App., 315; Dresch v. State, 14 Tex.Crim. App., 177.

Mann Trice, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.


Appellant was convicted for failing to work a public road. The judgment fails to show that the jury was selected, empaneled, and sworn. This is assigned as error. We think the point well taken. Article 831, Code Crim. Proc., provides that the judgment must show the selection, empaneling, and swearing of the jury. The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and Remanded.


Summaries of

Yates v. the State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Mar 24, 1897
39 S.W. 933 (Tex. Crim. App. 1897)
Case details for

Yates v. the State

Case Details

Full title:BOYD YATES v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Mar 24, 1897

Citations

39 S.W. 933 (Tex. Crim. App. 1897)
39 S.W. 933

Citing Cases

O'Quinn v. the State

" This definition was approved in the case of Smith v. State, 21 Texas Crim. App., 107. This case has been…

G. E. Morrison v. the State

An expert called to give his opinion as an expert must give one founded on his knowledge of the facts, or one…