Young v. State

• Decision Date: 03 June 1914
• Docket Number: (No. 3156.)
• Citation: Young v. State, 167 S.W. 1112, 74 Tex. Cr. R. 133 (Tex. Crim. App. 1914)
• Parties: YOUNG v. STATE.
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

167 S.W. 1112

YOUNG v.STATE.

(No. 3156.)

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 3, 1914.

Appeal from Navarro County Court; R. R. Owen, Judge.

Henry Young was convicted of unlawfully practicing medicine, and he appeals.Reversed, and cause dismissed.

Jack & Jack, of Corsicana, for appellant.C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

PRENDERGAST, P. J.

Appellant was prosecuted and convicted for unlawfully practicing medicine under articles 750 et seq., P. C.

The complaint and information is in two counts.The first avers that he on or about October 1, 1912, in Navarro county, "did then and there unlawfully practice medicine, and did then and there publicly profess to be a physician, and did then and there treat a physical disorder and disease, to wit, did then and there treat a cancer then and there afflicting the body of Mrs. J. T. Bolt; the said Henry Young not then and there being licensed and authorized under the laws of Texas to practice medicine, and not then and there practicing medicine under the provisions of the laws of Texas, and not then and there being a physician under a diploma of a reputable and legal college of medicine."The second count is that on the same day, in said county, he"did then and there treat and offer to treat a disease and disorder, to wit, a cancer on the body of Mrs. J. T. Bolt, and did then and there offer to effect a cure thereof, and did then and there charge therefor money and other compensation; the said Henry Young not then and there being a physician licensed to practice medicine under the laws of Texas, and not then and there being a legal practitioner of medicine in Texas under the provisions of the laws of this state, and not then and there being a practitioner of medicine under a diploma of a reputable and legal college of medicine."

It is seen that in neither of said counts is appellant's residence alleged, nor that he"has not registered, in the district clerk's office of the county in which he resides, his authority for so practicing, together with his age, post office address," etc.

The statute under which he was prosecuted is articles 750 and 755, P. C.They are:

"It shall be unlawful for any one to practice medicine, in any of its branches, upon human beings within the limits of this state who has not registered in the district clerk's office of the county in which he resides, his authority for so practicing, as herein prescribed, together with his age, post office address, place of birth, school of practice to which he professes to belong, subscribed and verified by oath; which, if willfully false, shall subject the applicant to conviction and punishment...