Bedwell v. State, 21703.
| Decision Date | 29 October 1941 |
| Docket Number | No. 21703.,21703. |
| Citation | 155 S.W.2d 930 |
| Parties | BEDWELL v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Hunt County; Charles Berry, Judge.
T. C. Bedwell was convicted of driving a motor vehicle along and on a public street while he was intoxicated, and he appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
L. D. Hartwell, of Greenville, for appellant.
Spurgeon E. Bell, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
The offense is driving a motor vehicle along and upon a public street in the city of Greenville, Texas, while intoxicated. The punishment assessed is confinement in the county jail for a period of five days and a fine of $400.
Appellant claims that the trial court erred in two respects, namely, in declining to sustain his motion to quash the indictment on the ground that the same is too vague and indefinite in that it fails to state upon what particular highway of the county or upon what street, if any, of any town in said county the appellant operated a motor vehicle while intoxicated. The second ground upon which he claims a reversal of the judgment is that the evidence is insufficient to justify and sustain his conviction.
We will discuss each of the claimed errors in the order in which they are presented.
Omitting the formal parts, the indictment reads as follows: "* * * That T. C. Bedwell on or about the 15 day of January Nineteen Hundred and Forty-one and anterior to the presentment of this indictment, in the County of Hunt and State of Texas, did then and there unlawfully while intoxicated and while under the influence of intoxicating liquor drive and operate a motor vehicle, to-wit, an automobile, upon a public highway in said county, etc."
We deem the indictment sufficient to charge an offense against the laws of the state. If appellant operated a motor vehicle upon any highway or street of a town or city in said county while intoxicated, he violated the law, and it would seem to us to be unnecessary to allege the particular street or highway upon which he drove his automobile. Of course, if the State in its pleading had designated a certain highway or a certain street of a particular city, then it would be required to prove the offense as charged. The State was not required to plead its evidence. If the indictment is sufficient to advise the accused of the particular offense with which he is charged, that is all the law requires. See White v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 69, 95 S.W.2d 429.
With reference to the second contention, we deem it sufficient to say that the testimony adduced by the State shows that appellant, while intoxicated, drove his automobile along and upon Wesley Street in the City of Greenville, Texas. The defendant and his witnesses denied that he was intoxicated or under the influence of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
May v. State
...the State, Phillips v. State, 597 S.W.2d 929 (Tex.Cr.App.1980), Cameron v. State, 401 S.W.2d 809 (Tex.Cr.App.1966), Bedwell v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 599, 155 S.W.2d 930 (1941), and it is a rare exception when an indictment drawn in the language of the penal statute is legally insufficient to......
-
Mixon v. State
...the State, Phillips v. State, 597 S.W.2d 929 (Tex.Cr.App.1980), Cameron v. State, 401 S.W.2d 809 (Tex.Cr.App.1966), Bedwell v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 599, 155 S.W.2d 930 (1941), and it is a rare exception when an indictment drawn in the language of the penal statute is legally insufficient to......
-
Gilliam v. State, 11-87-048-CR
...the State, Phillips v. State, 597 S.W.2d 929 (Tex.Cr.App.1980), Cameron v. State, 401 S.W.2d 809 (Tex.Cr.App.1966), Bedwell v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 599, 155 S.W.2d 930 (1941), and it is a rare exception when an indictment drawn in the language of the penal statute is legally insufficient to......
-
Phillips v. State
...a fact is essential for notice to the defendant, the indictment need not plead the evidence relied on by the State. Bedwell v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 599, 155 S.W.2d 930 (1941); McKenzie v. State, 450 S.W.2d 341 (Tex.Cr.App.1969), vacated in part (as to death penalty), 408 U.S. 938, 92 S.Ct. ......
-
Table of cases
...2002), §11:141 Beck v. State , 651 S.W.2d 827 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, no pet.), §7:71 Bedwell v. State , 142 Tex.Crim. 599, 155 S.W.2d 930 (App. 1941), §13:40 Beebe v. State , 811 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991), §16:133 Beeman v. State , 86 S.W.3d 613 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002), §7:3......
-
Table of cases
...2002), §11:141 Beck v. State , 651 S.W.2d 827 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, no pet.), §7:71 Bedwell v. State , 142 Tex.Crim. 599, 155 S.W.2d 930 (App. 1941), §13:40 Beebe v. State , 811 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991), §16:133 A-1 A-2 Texas DWI Manual Beeman v. State , 86 S.W.3d 613 (......
-
The Elements of DWI
...a charging instrument allege the name of a street or the road on which defendant drove. [ Bedwell v. State , 142 Tex. Crim. 599, 601, 155 S.W.2d 930 (App. 1941).] Neither is there a need to allege the speciic highway on which the driving while intoxicated is supposed to have taken place. Ho......
-
The Elements of DWI
...that a charging instrument allege the name of a street or the road on which defendant drove. [ Bedwell v. State , 142 Tex.Crim. 599, 601, 155 S.W.2d 930 (App. 1941).] Neither is there a need to allege the specific highway on which the driving while intoxicated is supposed to have taken plac......