Moss v. State, 19867.
Citation | 120 S.W.2d 1054 |
Decision Date | 02 November 1938 |
Docket Number | No. 19867.,19867. |
Parties | MOSS v. STATE. |
Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
Appeal from San Saba County Court; J. B. Harrell, Judge.
Sellman Moss was convicted for violating the local option liquor laws in a dry area and he appeals.
Affirmed.
J. Mitch Johnson, of San Saba, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
Appellant was convicted of violating the local option liquor laws in a dry area, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $200 and ninety days in jail.
The evidence is short and conclusive, only one witness being introduced by the State and no witness by the appellant. However, bills of exception Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 complain of the State being allowed to introduce the different orders of the commissioners court and the county judge relative to the election wherein the County of San Saba voted itself dry, and where they had also refused to allow the sale of 3.2 per cent beer. Appellant admitted the county was a dry area, and waived the introduction of such orders, etc., but the State nevertheless introduced same, and they were read into the statement of facts, hence his bills.
The State had the right to introduce such orders, and read the same as a portion of the facts proven, and we see no error in it thus doing, notwithstanding appellant's admission.
Bill of exceptions No. 5 relates to the refusal of the court to give a peremptory instruction to the jury to find the appellant not guilty. We confess that no reason for the giving of same appears to us, and none is set forth in such bill, and it is overruled.
The testimony relative to the facts of the complained of sale is short, concise and conclusive, and we set the same forth in its entirety:
The judgment is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Harrison v. State, 46932
...duty and the function of presenting to the jury all relevant evidence, nor avoid facing the full facts of the crime. Moss v. State, 135 Tex.Cr.R. 404, 120 S.W.2d 1054; Beard v. State, 146 Tex.Cr.R. 96, 171 S.W.2d 869; Pittman v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 434 S.W.2d 352; Stokes v. State, 162 Tex.C......
- Fowler v. State