Case ID: sw_238/html/0218-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HAWKINS, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MILNER v. STATE.
    (No. 6636.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    March 1, 1922.)
    Criminal Iaw<&wkey;l4 — Prosecution under'amended liquor law dismissed.
    A prosecution for the possessing intoxicating liquor under the state-wide prohibition law prior to Acts 37th Deg. (1921) 1st Called Sess. c. 61, amending the same, will be dismissed; the mere possession of intoxicating liquor not being an offense.
    Appeal from District Court, Titus County; R. T. Wilkinson, Judge.
    Ed Milner was convicted for possessing intoxicating liquor, and appeals.
    Reversed, and prosecution ordered dismissed.
    Wilkinson & Cook and I. N. Williams, all of Mt. Pleasant, for appellant.
    R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   HAWKINS, J.

Appellant was indicted and convicted for the possession of intoxicating liquor under the state-wide prohibition law (Acts 36th Leg. 2d Called Sess. c. 78) prior to the Acts of the 37th Legislature, 1st and 2d Called Sessions, p. 233, amending the same. Under the authority of the cases Petit v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 235 S. W. 579, Francis v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 235 S. W. 580, and many other cases reported in the same volume of the Southwestern Reporter, and Ex parte.Mitchum (No. 6772; Tex. Cr. App.) 237 S. W. 936, (opinion delivered February 1, 1922) the conviction cannot stand under the indictment in its present form.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the prosecution ordered dismissed under the present indictment.