Patton v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Patton v. State, 35 Tex. 92 (Tex. 1872)
Evans
Patton v. State
Opinion of the Court
The appellant went bail in the sum of one thousand dollars for the appearance of one Watson. “ at the next term of the District Court of Henderson, county.”
Watson failed to appear, and judgment nisi was-taken.
On the scire facias, Patton appeared, and by “plea, and answer” took special exceptions to the sufficiency of the bond.
The exceptions are well taken, for it does not distinctly name the offense, but embraces a description of two offenses, and subjects the appellant to two forfeitures on the same bond. (See Paschal’s Digest, Article 2732; Lawton v. The State, 5 Texas, 270.)
The judgment is reversed, and the case dismissed.
Reversed and dismissed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- J. S. Patton v. State
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- The condition of a bail bond required the accused to appear and answer “such indictments or indictment as may be preferred against him by the grand jury of H. county, for the following offenses against the laws of the State of Texas and then, without naming any offense, its recitals proceeded to describe two separate charges of theft. Held, that the bond is insufficient.