Stroud v. State

Citations

• 33 Tex. 650

Syllabus

<p>X. In this appeal from a conviction of a misdemeanor, it is strongly intimated that separate recognizances must be taken from the defendant and his sureties, and that one joint recognizance of the defendant and his sureties will not do; but m the present case, more obvious delects in the recognizance are also urged as grounds on which the appeal is dismissed.</p> <p>2. The recognizance bound the defendant “ to abide the judgment of the Supreme Court, at its next term, to be held at Austin, upon the charge against him preferred by the bill of indictment in this cause for unlawful gaming.'’ Held, that the recognizance does not state the name of the offense with which the defendant was charged, nor does it appear from it that the defendant is accused of any offense against the laws of this State—the charge in the indictment being for playing cards in a house for retailing spirituous liquors.</p>