State v. Flores

Citations

• 33 Tex. 444

Syllabus

<p>1. An indictment, founded on Article 2055, Paschal’s Digest, which charged that the defendant “did wilfully and unlawfully permit a gaming bank, to-wit, a monte bank, to be dealt for the purpose of gaming, in a house under the control of him,” was good ; and it was error to quash it for insufficiency. (Brosshard v. The State, 25 Supplement Texas Reports, 209, ci.ed by the court.)</p> <p>2. That the signature of the foreman of the grand jury was not upon the indictment was no sufficient objection to it. The indictment was good without it. (The State v. Powell, 2d Texas, cited by the court.)</p>