History
  • No items yet
midpage
Berry v. State
105 Tex. Crim. 549
Tex. Crim. App.
1926
Check Treatment

The offense is forgery; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

There were two counts in the indictment, one of which charged the forgery of a check, the other the attempted passing of a forged check. In each instance the forgery was of the name of J. W. Craven. The proof relied upon was the making of a check signed L. W. Craven.

The state's attorney before this court concedes that there is a fatal variance between the evidence and the averment. In proof of this offense, if the alleged forged instrument is available, its introduction in evidence is essential. See Wilson v. State, 92 Tex.Crim. Rep.; Dovaline v. State, 14 Tex.Crim. App. 312. It is likewise necessary that the instrument introduced in evidence coincide with that described in the indictment. See Fischl v. State, 54 Tex.Crim. Rep.; Vernon's Ann. Tex. P. C., Vol. 2, p. 164. The variance in the present case is fatal. See Wallace v. State, 87 Tex. Crim. 527.

The bills complaining of the procedure are not sustained.

For the reason stated, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded. *Page 550

Case Details

Case Name: Berry v. State
Court Name: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Date Published: Dec 22, 1926
Citation: 105 Tex. Crim. 549
Docket Number: No. 10521.
Court Abbreviation: Tex. Crim. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.