Rollins v. State

Citations

• 22 Tex. Ct. App. 548
• 3 S.W. 759
• 1886 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 286

Syllabus

<p>Forgery—Indictment.—It is an established rule that a -written instrument to be the subject of an indictment for forgery, must be such as would be valid, if genuine, for the purpose intended. If void or invalid upon its face, and it can not be made good by averment, the crime of forgery can not be predicated upon it. In other words, if the instrument is absolutely void upon its face, it can not be made the subject of forgery; but, if the legality be doubtful, and by proper allegations its legality is capable of being shown to the court, it is a subject of forgery. The indictment describes the instrument involved in this ease as follows: “July3, 1885. Apolas (meaning Appollas) & (meaning and) Halsal. please let Mr. G-. B. Rollins (meaning Mr. G-. B. Rollins) have 4$ OOd (meaning four dollars) in goods and oblige; charge to me. Joel ESler (meaning Joel Eller.)” Held sufficient, under the rule announced above, to support the assignment of forgery; wherefore the motion to quash the indictment was properly overruled.</p>