Selvidge v. State
| Decision Date | 13 June 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 16913.,16913. |
| Citation | 72 S.W.2d 1079 |
| Parties | SELVIDGE v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Harrison County; Reuben A. Hall, Judge.
J. V. Selvidge was convicted of bribery, and he appeals.
Reversed, and prosecution ordered dismissed.
W. M. Futch, of Henderson, P. O. Beard, of Marshall, and Robert K. Crain, of Longview, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
The appellant was tried and convicted of the offense of bribery, and his punishment assessed at confinement in the state penitentiary for a term of four years.
At the very threshold of this case we are confronted with an indictment which seems to be insufficient to warrant or sustain a conviction for said offense. The indictment, omitting the formal parts, reads as follows: "* * * That J. V. Selvidge on or about the 10th day of December, 1933, and anterior to the presentment of this indictment, in the County of Harrison and State of Texas, did then and there unlawfully, willfully and corruptly bribe J. C. Sanders, who was then and there the legally qualified sheriff of Harrison County, Texas, to permit the said J. V. Selvidge to unlawfully transport spirituous, vinous and malt liquors capable of producing intoxication in Harrison County, Texas; and the said J. V. Selvidge did then and there unlawfully, willfully and corruptly give to the said J. C. Sanders, sheriff of Harrison County, Texas, $200.00 in money to permit him the said J. V. Selvidge to unlawfully transport spirituous, vinous and malt liquors capable of producing intoxication in Harrison County, Texas, in violation of the official duty of the said J. C. Sanders."
An indictment to be sufficient must specifically allege every constituent element of the offense and leave nothing to inference or intendment. To constitute bribery of a public official it must be made to appear that the official for a valuable consideration or reward agreed to refrain from performing an official act imposed upon him by law, or that he agreed to corruptly perform the same contrary to law or to the well-known rules of honesty and integrity. Article 189, Penal Code 1911 (Pen. Code 1925, art. 173) reads as follows: "If any person shall bribe, or offer to bribe, a sheriff or any other peace officer to do any other act not heretofore enumerated, contrary to his duty as an officer, or to omit to do any duty incumbent upon him as an officer, he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Defreitas
...could only solicit a bribe because "[h]e dealt with a subject over which he had jurisdiction."); Selvidge v. State , 126 Tex.Crim. 489, 72 S.W.2d 1079, 1080 (Tex. Crim. App. 1934) ("To constitute bribery of a public official it must be made to appear that the official for a valuable conside......
-
State v. Greer
...42 Ga.App. 443, 156 S.E. 623; State v. Beliveau, 114 Me. 477, 96 A. 779; State v. Adams, 308 Mo. 664, 274 S.W. 21; Selvidge v. State, 126 Tex. Cr.R. 489, 72 S.W.2d 1079; State v. Hart, 136 Wash. 278, 239 P. 834; State v. King, 103 W. Va. 662, 138 S.E. 330; Bishop's Practical Directions and ......
-
Nell v. State
...77 S.E.2d 917; State v. Bell, 1967, 78 N.M. 317, 431 P.2d 50; State v. Nadeau, 1954, 81 R.I. 505, 105 A.2d 194; Selvidge v. State, 1934, 126 TexCr.R. 489, 72 S.W.2d 1079; State v. Austin, 1965, 65 Wash.2d 916, 400 P.2d 603; State v. Good, 1967, 151 W.Va. 813, 156 S.E.2d 8; State v. Hibicke,......
-
United States v. Defreitas
... ... should ... guide a court's decision of whether to certify questions ... to a state's highest court. Additionally, we hold that ... the evidence presented was insufficient to prove that ... Defreitas engaged in an ... because "[h]e dealt with a subject over which he had ... jurisdiction."); Selvidge v. State , 72 S.W.2d ... 1079, 1080 (Tex. Crim. App. 1934) ("To constitute ... bribery of a public official it must be made to appear ... ...