Bowden v. State

Citations

• 1 Tex. Ct. App. 137

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Procedure. — Appellant and one A. were jointly indicted, in 1872, on a charge of burglary. The district attorney, with the concurrence of the district judge, entered a nolle prosequi as to appellant upon an agreement between' him and the district attorney that appellant should regularly attend court and testify as a witness for the state on the trial of A., and appellant entered into a recognizance so to do. At the succeeding term of the court appellant was again indicted for the same offense. To this indictment he pleaded the agreement both in abatement and in bar;, but the pleas were stricken out by the court below on a general demurrer interposed by the district attorney, and the appellant was placed on trial on his plea of “ not guilty,” which resulted in his conviction. Held, error. The appellant should not have been tried on the subsequent indictment so* long as the agreement between him and the state was subsisting, and he alone prevented from a specific performance of his part by the want of an. opportunity so to do.</p>