Cotton v. State

Texas Supreme Court July 1, 1875

Cotton v. State, 43 Tex. 169 (Tex. 1875)

Roberts

Opinion of the Court

Roberts, Chief Justice.

The defense set up in this case was that the particular transaction charged in the indictment, and for which the grand jury intended to indict the defendant, was not that which was proved oil the *170trial. The court declined to recognize defendant’s right to institute an inquiry into the intention of the grand jury further than as expressed in the indictment found by them. This was correct, .as formerly held by this court. (Grain v. The State, 14 Tex., 634.) We find no error in the case.

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: Frank Cotton v. State
Cited By: 3 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Indictment—Evidence.—When an offense is proved as charged in an indictment, the fact that the witnesses on whose testimony the bill was found knew nothing of the particular offense proved cannot be availed of as a defense. A defendant has no right to inquire into the intentions of the grand jury except as they are expressed in the indictment.