Brown v. State

• Citation: 12 S.W. 1101
• Parties: BROWN <I>et al.</I> <I>v.</I> STATE.
• Decision Date: 30 November 1889
• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas

12 S.W. 1101

BROWN et al.

v. STATE.

Court of Appeals of Texas.

November 30, 1889.

Appeal from district court, Ellis county; ANSON RAINEY, Judge.

Grace & Templeton, for appellants. Asst. Atty. Gen. Davidson, for the State.

WHITE, P. J.

This appeal is from a judgment final on a forfeited bail-bond. Brown, having been brought before a justice of the peace, sitting as an examining court, upon a charge of assault with intent to murder, waived an examination, and was required by said justice to enter into bond in the sum of $1,000 for his appearance at the next term of the district court, to answer said charge. Brown executed said bond, with sureties, conditioned as the law requires, was discharged from custody, and the bond returned to the district court. This bond was forfeited, and judgment nisi rendered upon it. In the scire facias issued to the sureties the cause of action, as set forth in this writ of scire facias or citation, is, in effect, that defendant Brown, "in a certain prosecution pending in the district court, did enter into a bond with D. Mahoney, G. L. Adkisson, and D. B. Bullard as sureties, in the penal sum of one thousand dollars, conditioned that the said defendant should make his personal appearance before the said court on the 3d day of September, 1888, then and there to answer the state of Texas upon a charge by information before W. L. Harding, J. P., precinct No. 1, Ellis county, Texas, duly presented in said court, wherein J. L. Brown, the said defendant, is charged with the offense of assault to murder, and there remain from day to day, and from term to term, until discharged by law; and whereas, on, to-wit, the 24th day of September, 1888, before said court, then in session for said Ellis county, said prosecution was called for trial, and the said J. L. Brown wholly failed to appear and answer said accusation against him, and thereupon said bond was duly declared forfeited by said court, and it was ordered and adjudged and decreed by said court," etc. From the reading of this scire facias it would appear that the bond was forfeited and judgment nisi rendered in the justice court, and upon a charge pending by information in that court. If so, then the judgment nisi rendered by the district court would not sustain the allegations in the petition, or citation, which subserves the purposes of a petition. Again, the scire facias alleges that the bond was executed "in a certain prosecution pending in the district court." This...