Williams v. State
Walter Williams v. the State
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
PRENDERGAST, Judge.
Appellant was convicted for violation of section 31 of the Acts of 1917, page 483, making it an offense to -use another’s motor vehicle without his consent. The term of the court at which he was convicted adjourned Dec.ember 8, 1918. During that term he did not enter into a recognizance in order to enable him to appeal, but instead, several days after the adjournment attempted to give this court jurisdiction by executing an appeal bond. The statute (art. 918, C. C. P.) and the decisions thereunder in Vernon’s Crim. Proc., page 880, all hold that in order to give this court jurisdiction of an appeal from a misdemeanor conviction a recognizance must be entered into in open, court before the court adjourns for the term at which the conviction, occurs. This court has not and can not acquire jurisdiction of this case because of a failure to enter into a recognizance. Some of the cases are cited. The Assistant <-7 e e Attorney General’s motion, therefore, to dismiss this appeal because of failure to enter into such a recognizance must be, and is, granted.
Appeal dismissed.
Dismissed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.