Skip to main content

McCoy v. State

Citations

  • 37 Tex. 219

Syllabus

<p>1. On scire facias against the sureties on a forfeited bail bond, they pleaded a general denial, and alleged that there was no indictment against their principal for the ofiense named in the bail bond, and that the indictment against their principal was for a different ofíense than that named in the bail bond, and thereupon demanded a jury trial. Held, that the only questions of fact to be inquired into upon the return of a scire facias upon a forfeited bail bond are those enumerated in Article 2884, Paschal’s Digest, which are, first, the death of the principal defendant; second, sickness of the principal defendant or some unavoidable circumstance which prevented his appearance in court; and third, failure to present an indictment or information at the first term of the court which may be held after the defendant has been admitted to bail, in cases, where the party was bound over before indictment. Held further', that as the last of these questions is to be determined by an inspection of the record, the defendants had no right to demand a jury, and the court below did not err in refusing them a jury trial.</p> <p>2. In obedience to a scire facias, defendants appeared at the next term of the court after entry of the judgment nisi on a forfeited bail bond, and moved to quash the bond for certain specified defects. Held, that the motion to quash the bail bond might have been properly presented before the forfeiture and the judgment nisi, or after a motion to set aside the judgment nisi had been sustained, but could not be entertained while the judgment stood.</p> <p>3. Section 418 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Article 2884 of Paschal’s Digest) was enacted for the purpose of confining a surety’s defense to a scire facias on a forfeited bail bond or recognizance to one of the three reasons enumerated in the section, and to prevent any inquiry as to the guilt or innocence of the principal defendant, or of the validity or invalidity of the indictment. Therefore he

Judges: Ogden

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.