State v. Johnson
| Decision Date | 01 January 1869 |
| Citation | 32 Tex. 96 |
| Parties | THE STATE v. PHIL JOHNSON. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
1. An indictment is quashable unless it contains allegations both of the time and of the place at which the offense is charged to have been committed.
2. The time must be alleged, in order that it may appear that the offense is not barred by the statute of limitations.
3. The place must be alleged, in order that it may appear that the court has jurisdiction of the cause.
APPEAL from Smith. Tried below before the Hon. Samuel L. Earle.
The appellee was indicted for the theft of $160 in coin and $60 in currency, the property of B. H. Denson. The indictment was quashed on his motion, and the district attorney appealed on behalf of the state.
E. B. Turner, Attorney General, for the state, conceded the insufficiency of the indictment.
The motion to quash the indictment in this case was properly sustained. There is no allegation in it, of either the time or of the place of the commission of the offense. The first is necessary, that it may appear from the charge it is not barred by the statute of limitations. The other is indispensable, that the court may know whether it has jurisdiction of the cause. For these defects it was rightfully quashed. The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Benson v. State
...of a day certain, as the time of the commission of the offense. State v. Randle, 41 Tex. 292; State v. Slack, 30 Tex. 354; State v. Johnson, 32 Tex. 96; State v. Eubanks, 41 Tex. 291. However authorities equally ancient and respected laid down the rule that it was sufficient to allege that ......
-
Mealer v. State
...62 S. W. 753; Thurman v. State, 45 Tex. Cr. R. 569, 78 S. W. 937; State v. Eubanks, 41 Tex. 291; State v. Slack, 30 Tex. 355; State v. Johnson, 32 Tex. 96. It has likewise uniformly been held by this and the Supreme Court that the allegation of the date when an offense was committed is a ma......
-
Kirkendall v. State
...66 S. W. 769; Thurman v. State, 45 Tex. Cr. R. 569, 78 S. W. 937; State v. Eubanks, 41 Tex. 291; State v. Slack, 30 Tex. 355; State v. Johnson, 32 Tex. 96. It has likewise uniformly been held by this and the Supreme Court that the allegation of the date when an offense was committed is a ma......