Baker v. State, 15800.
| Citation | 58 S.W.2d 535 |
| Decision Date | 22 March 1933 |
| Docket Number | No. 15800.,15800. |
| Parties | BAKER v. STATE. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
Appeal from District Court, Gregg County; Reuben A. Hall, Judge.
O. P. Baker was convicted for selling a narcotic drug, and he appeals.
Reversed and cause dismissed.
R. E. Dickson, of Longview, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
Conviction for selling a narcotic drug; punishment, five years in the penitentiary.
The Legislature, in defining the term "narcotic drug," makes it include many drugs specifically named. In other words, by the very terms of the act, which is chapter 97, Acts Regular Session, 42d Leg. (Vernon's Ann. P. C. art. 725a, § 1 et seq.), "narcotic drug" is made a generic term, in which case, under many authorities, it is not enough that one indicted for a violation of the provisions of said act be charged with possession, sale, etc., of narcotic drugs; but such indictment should go further and name the particular drug so possessed, or sold in the particular case. Brewer v. State, 5 Tex. App. 248; McAfee v. State, 38 Tex. Cr. R. 124, 41 S. W. 627; Dixon v. State, 21 Tex. App. 517, 1 S. W. 448; Kennedy v. State, 86 Tex. Cr. R. 450, 216 S. W. 1086; Todd v. State, 89 Tex. Cr. R. 99, 229 S. W. 515; Stanford v. State, 99 Tex. Cr. R. 111, 268 S. W. 161. The indictment in the instant case should have added to the averment that a narcotic drug was possessed, a further allegation such as, to wit, morphine—or whatever drug was involved.
The indictment being insufficient, the judgment is reversed and the cause dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Swope v. State
... ... 5 The Court in Terry cites Baker v. State, 123 Tex.Crim. 209, 58 S.W.2d 534 (Tex.Crim.App.1933), wherein it held "[i]t is the intent of the Constitution that the accused in the ... ...
-
Ex parte Charles
...delivered to Thomas Connolly a dangerous drug which could not be dispensed without a prescription. See e. g., Baker v. State, 123 Tex.Cr.R. 212, 58 S.W.2d 535 (1933); Horton v. State, 123 Tex.Cr.R. 237, 58 S.W.2d 833 (1933). By adding the allegation that the name of the dangerous drug is si......
-
Fletcher v. State, 41678
...396 S.W.2d 873; Horton v. State, 123 Tex.Cr.R. 237, 58 S.W.2d 833; Baker v. State, 123 Tex.Cr.R. 209, 58 S.W.2d 534; Baker v. State, 123 Tex.Cr.R. 212, 58 S.W.2d 535, is misplaced. In those cases the indictment or information merely alleged possession 'of a dangerous drug' or possession 'of......
-
Dossey v. State
...what the drug was of which he was under the influence. The motion to quash should have been sustained. The case of Baker v. State, 123 Tex.Cr.R. 212, 58 S.W.2d 535, directly supports the conclusion just expressed. This court held that an indictment, therein, for selling a narcotic drug shou......