Bridges v. State, No. 34053

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Citation83 S.Ct. 38,172 Tex.Crim. 508,360 S.W.2d 531
Decision Date03 January 1962
Parties, Blue Sky L. Rep. P 70,579 W. L. BRIDGES, Sr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Docket NumberNo. 34053

Page 531

360 S.W.2d 531
172 Tex.Crim. 508, Blue Sky L. Rep. P 70,579
W. L. BRIDGES, Sr., Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
No. 34053.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Jan. 3, 1962.
Certiorari Denied Oct. 8, 1962.
See 83 S.Ct. 38.

Robert B. Billings, Dallas, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Criminal Dist. Atty., Phil Burleson, Asst. Dist. Atty., Dallas, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

DICE, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted upon a plea of guilty before the court without a jury under The Securities Act, Art. 581-1, Vernon's Ann.Civ.St., for the offense of the unlawful sale of securities and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

No statement of facts of the evidence adduced upon the trial accompanies the record and there are no bills of exception.

Appellant's sole contention on appeal is that the indictment fails to charge an offense because it did not negative the exempt transactions enumerated in sec. 5 of The Securities Act. The contention is urged as fundamental error, no exception or motion to quash the indictment having been filed by appellant in the trial court.

In Baker v. State, 132 Tex.Cr.R. 527, 106 S.W.2d 308, 311, Judge Lattimore speaking for this Court, in announcing the rule with reference to the necessity of negativing statutory exceptions in charging an offense in an indictment said:

'From what we have said above, and as far as we have been able to ascertain, our courts have uniformly held that when the [172 Tex.Crim. 509] Legislature sees fit to create exceptions to the general penal provisions of a statute if such exceptions be placed in a separate section or article from the one containing the definition of the offense, or if they be not such as to be essential to the definition of the

Page 532

offense, it will not be necessary to negative such exceptions in the indictment charging such offense. * * *'

See also 1 Branch's Ann.P.C.2d par. 530, p. 508, and cases there cited.

An examination of The Securities Act clearly reflects that the exempt transactions, separately enumerated in sec. 5 thereof, are not a part of the offense of unlawfully selling securities as defined in other sections of the Act. It was not necessary that the indictment negative the exempt transactions enumerated in sec. 5 of the Act in charging appellant with the offense.

The allegations contained in the second count of the indictment under which appellant stands...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • Florida Auto Auction of Orlando, Inc. v. U.S., Nos. 95-1271
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • January 31, 1996
    ...and Washington. See Aeroglide Corp. v. Zeh, 301 F.2d 420, 422 (2d Cir.) (applying New York law), Page 506 cert. denied, 371 U.S. 822, 83 S.Ct. 38, 9 L.Ed.2d 61 (1962); Lewiston Trust Co. v. Deveno, 145 Me. 224, 74 A.2d 457, 458-59 (1950); State Securities Co. v. Svoboda, 172 Neb. 526, 110 N......
  • Cox v. State, No. 49913
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • May 28, 1975
    ...supra), the State was not required to negative the exemption as one of its elements of proof. See Bridges v. State, 172 Tex.Cr.R. 508, 360 S.W.2d 531, cert. denied, 371 U.S. 821, 83 S.Ct. 38, 9 L.Ed.2d 61; See Salazar v. State (Tex.Cr.App.), 423 S.W.2d 297 (1968). The burden rested with app......
  • Dean v. State, No. 41204
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • October 30, 1968
    ...supra), the State was not required to negative the exemption as one of its elements of proof. See Bridges v. State, 172 Tex.Cr.R. 508, 360 S.W.2d 531, cert. denied, 371 U.S. 821, 83 S.Ct. 38, 9 L.Ed.2d 61; See also Salazar v. State, 423 S.W.2d 297 (1968). The burden rested with appellant to......
3 cases
  • Florida Auto Auction of Orlando, Inc. v. U.S., Nos. 95-1271
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • January 31, 1996
    ...and Washington. See Aeroglide Corp. v. Zeh, 301 F.2d 420, 422 (2d Cir.) (applying New York law), Page 506 cert. denied, 371 U.S. 822, 83 S.Ct. 38, 9 L.Ed.2d 61 (1962); Lewiston Trust Co. v. Deveno, 145 Me. 224, 74 A.2d 457, 458-59 (1950); State Securities Co. v. Svoboda, 172 Neb. 526, 110 N......
  • Cox v. State, No. 49913
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • May 28, 1975
    ...supra), the State was not required to negative the exemption as one of its elements of proof. See Bridges v. State, 172 Tex.Cr.R. 508, 360 S.W.2d 531, cert. denied, 371 U.S. 821, 83 S.Ct. 38, 9 L.Ed.2d 61; See Salazar v. State (Tex.Cr.App.), 423 S.W.2d 297 (1968). The burden rested with app......
  • Dean v. State, No. 41204
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • October 30, 1968
    ...supra), the State was not required to negative the exemption as one of its elements of proof. See Bridges v. State, 172 Tex.Cr.R. 508, 360 S.W.2d 531, cert. denied, 371 U.S. 821, 83 S.Ct. 38, 9 L.Ed.2d 61; See also Salazar v. State, 423 S.W.2d 297 (1968). The burden rested with appellant to......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT