Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 89
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1875.] THE STATE V. CORBIT. 89
Opinion of the court.
tion of the offense charged, is no reason why the information
should be quashed, unless the affidavit must also be
made during the session of the court. Such a supposition,
however, is warranted neither by the letter nor spirit of
the code. The inference to be drawn from it is plainly to
As no objection was made to the action taken upon the
information during vacation, but the information itself was
quashed because it was not presented in open court, what
we have said might suffice to dispose of the case. In view,
however, of its importance, we deem it proper to give the
question presented in defendant's motion a more direct
The primary pleading in criminal actions on the part of
the State is the indictment or information. (Code Criminal
Procedure, art. 481.) Those on the part of the defendant
are classified, and the causes or grounds embraced
in each of these classes are specifically enumerated and set
forth in the succeeding articles. The only grounds of objection
indicated in any of these articles which seems to
give the slightest apparent support to the proposition that
the information must be filed during the session of the
court, is that in which it is said an information may be
excepted to for form, if it does not appear to have been
presented in the proper court, as required by art. 403 of
the same code. (Code Criminal Procedure, art. 488.) The
article to which reference is here made says an information
is sufficient if it has the eight requisites therein
enumerated. The second of these requisites is that it
shall appear to have been presented in a court having
jurisdiction of the offense set forth. This evidently has
reference to the jurisdiction of the court to hear and determine
as to the offense presented by the information,
and not the time at which the District Attorney may commence
or institute a prosecution of the offense by information.
If, then, the defendant can object to the information
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/97/?rotate=270: accessed August 18, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .