Shubert v. State
Shubert v. State
Opinion of the Court
Defendant’s plea of former acquittal was bad upon its face, and was properly stricken out upon exception made thereto by the State. (Wright v. The State, 17 Texas Ct. App,, 152.)
But his plea of former conviction was in all respects a valid plea, alleging in due form facts which, if proved, would constitute a bar to the present prosecution. (Wright v. The State, 17 Texas Ct. App., 152.) This plea should not have been stricken out, but the defendant should have been allowed to introduce evidence in support of it; and if any evidence had been adduced in support of it, the issues made by it should have been submitted to and passed upon by the jury. (Grisham v. The State, 19 Texas Ct. App., 504.)
Because, in our opinion, the court erred in striking out the defendant’s plea of former conviction, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.
Reversed and remanded.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- M. Shubert v. State
- Cited By
- 4 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Practice—Autrefois Acquit and Convict—Case Approved.—See the opinion for an approval of Wright’s ease, 17 Texas Court of Appeals, 152, on the doctrines of autrefois acquit and autrefois convict. See also the statement of the ease for a plea of former acquittal, which, being bad upon its face, was properly stricken out; and for a plea of former conviction which, being in all respects a valid plea, and alleging in due form facts which, if proved, would constitute a bar to this prosecution, entitled the accused to a hearing upon the same; wherefore the trial court erred in striking it out, and refusing to hear evidence in support of the same.