History
  • No items yet
midpage
Phillips v. State
1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 93
| Tex. Crim. App. | 1925
|
Check Treatment

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

The indictment is regular. A plea of guilty was entered. There is no complaint of the procedure. The court heard evidence, the sufficiency of which to show the appellant's guilt is challenged. This position cannot be sustained. See Doans v. State, 36 Tex.Crim. Rep.; Gipsom v. State,86 Tex. Crim. 364.

A plea of guilty having been entered, the inadequacy of the evidence to show guilt is not available unless it is such that it shows the accused to be innocent. Duncan v. State,86 Tex. Crim. 191; Grandberry v. State, 86 Tex.Crim. Rep.; Taylor v. State, 88 Tex.Crim. Rep.; Hardin v. State,88 Tex. Crim. 495; Connally v. State, 90 Tex. Crim. 285; Garcia v. State, 91 Tex.Crim. Rep..

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed. *Page 189

Case Details

Case Name: Phillips v. State
Court Name: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Date Published: Feb 4, 1925
Citation: 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 93
Docket Number: No. 9079.
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.