Opinion

Pope v. State

  • 117 Tex. Crim. 13
  • 35 S.W.2d 412
  • 1931 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 256
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Filed
Jan 28, 1931
Status
Published
Author
Hawkins
On the bench
Hawkins
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 51.0%

The opinion

HAWKINS, Judge.

— Conviction is for aggravated assault, punishment being confinement in the county jail for ninety days.

No statement of facts is brought to this court. The only question presented arises on the court’s refusal to arrest the judgment.

In substance the averments of the indictment are that appellant drove an automobile at a greater rate of speed than permitted by law and that while so negligently and carelessly driving said car he struck and collided with another car being driven by W. E. Thomas, and that by reason of such collision serious bodily injury was inflicted on said Thomas.

By motion in arrest of judgment appellant attacked the indictment as duplicitous. If there is any merit in appellant’s complaint (which it is not necessary to decide) it came too late. The question of duplicity must be raised in limine. It cannot be raised after verdict by motion in arrest. Melley v. State, 93 Texas Crim. Rep., 522 , 248 S. W., 367 ; Kocich v. State, 94 Texas Crim. Rep., 74 , 249 S. W., 494 ; Lumus v. State, 94 Texas Crim. Rep., 191 , 250 S. W., 425 ; Brown v. State, 96 Texas Crim. Rep., 413 , 257 S. W., 891 ; Garner v. State, 100 Texas Crim. Rep., 626 , 272 S. W., 167 ; Ramsey v. State, 108 Texas Crim. Rep., 182 , 299 S. W., 411 ; Anderson v. State, 113 Texas Crim. Rep., 450 , 21 S. W. (2d) 499 .

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.