Mosely v. State

Citations

• 18 Tex. Ct. App. 311
• 1885 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 97

Syllabus

<p>1. Sunday Law.— Indictment charged that the appellant, being a trader in a lawful business, did, on a designated Sunday, “sell merchandise.” The defense excepted to the indictment because it did not allege that the merchandise was not burial or shrouding material, nor provisions sold before 9 o’clock in the forenoon, etc., sales of which are excepted from the operation of the act of April 10, 1883, which creates the offense. But held that the exception to the indictment was properly overruled because the proviso by which such sales are excluded from the operation of the act is neither a part of the enacting clause nor descriptive of the offense defined by said act.</p> <p>2. Same.— When, as in the Sunday Law of 1883, the definition of the offense is so entirely separable from the exceptions that its constituents may be clearly and accurately alleged without reference to the exceptions, it is not necessary to negative the exceptions. Otherwise if the exceptions are so incorporated in the definition of the offense that its ingredients cannot be clearly and accurately alleged without negativing the exceptions.</p> <p>3. Indictment — Certainty—Sunday Law.— As every inhibited sale of merchandise on Sunday constitutes a separate offense, it is necessary that the indictment shall with reasonable certainty specify the sale alleged as the offense for which the accused is to be tried. Exception was well taken to an indictment which charged that the accused did on a certain Sunday “ sell merchandise,” but which neither described the merchandise, nor named the purchaser, nor otherwise identified the inculpatory transaction,</p>