Johnson v. State

• Decision Date: 26 May 1915
• Docket Number: (No. 3565.)
• Citation: 177 S.W. 490
• Parties: JOHNSON v. STATE.
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

Page 490

177 S.W. 490

JOHNSON v. STATE.

(No. 3565.)

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 26, 1915.

Appeal from Palo Pinto County Court; J. T. Ranspot, Judge.

Ira Johnson was convicted of violating the law relating to the payment of poll taxes, and appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Moyers & Creighton, of Mineral Wells, for appellant. C. C. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

DAVIDSON, J.

The indictment, omitting formal parts, alleges:

That appellant "did then and there unlawfully become the agent of J. F. Pointer for the purpose of obtaining the receipt for the said J. F. Pointer for poll tax for the state of Texas and county of Palo Pinto due by said J. F. Pointer to the said state and county for the year 1913, and as said agent the said Ira Johnson did unlawfully pay the tax collector of Palo Pinto county, state of Texas, the poll tax due by the said J. F. Pointer to the state and county aforesaid for the year 1913, and did then and there and thereby obtain the receipt for said poll tax for the said J. F. Pointer, against the peace and dignity of the state."

This case was tried in the county court. Various objections are urged to the indictment, principally that it charges a misdemeanor and a felony in the same count, which makes it duplicitous. If it only intended to charge appellant with knowingly becoming the agent of Pointer to obtain a poll tax receipt or certificate of exemption, or if it charged that he gave money to Pointer to induce him to pay his poll tax, it might be brought under article 229 of the Penal Code of 1911, but it does not undertake to charge that he gave money to Pointer, but it charges that appellant paid the tax collector of Palo Pinto county the poll tax due by Pointer, which would come within the provisions and denunciation of article 233. That article provides that any candidate for office or other person who pays or procures another to pay the poll tax of a citizen, except as permitted by law, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished, etc. The indictment is rather an admixture of articles 229 and 233 of the Penal Code. If the indictment is duplicitous, one charging a misdemeanor and the other a felony, of course the indictment would be quashed. A misdemeanor and a felony cannot be so charged in this state. One would be a misdemeanor, with jurisdiction in the county court, while the other would be a felony, with jurisdiction in the district court. This would render it duplicitous. The writer is...