History
  • No items yet
midpage
Hicks v. State
32 Tex. 368
Tex.
1869
Check Treatment
Caldwell, J.

There is a motion by the Attorney General to dismiss this case, because there is no sufficient recognizance. Yet, it is admitted by the Attorney General that the recognizance follows the indictment, which, itself, charges no offense against the laws of the State, and, in his opinion, ought to have been quashed.

The indictment is founded on Art. 2441, Paschal’s Digest, but omits to charge that the act was done “ without complying with the laws regulating estrays.” (State v. Hutchinson, 26 Texas, 111.) The indictment is bad, and ought to have been quashed.

For this error, the judgment is reversed and the cause dismissed.

Reversed and dismissed.

Case Details

Case Name: Hicks v. State
Court Name: Texas Supreme Court
Date Published: Jul 1, 1869
Citation: 32 Tex. 368
Court Abbreviation: Tex.
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.