Case ID: sw_168/html/0530-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PRENDERGAST, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PULLUM v. STATE.
    (No. 3193.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    June 24, 1914.)
    Criminal Law (§ 1184*) — Appeal—Review —Disposition of Cause — Defect of Sentence.
    Where accused was properly convicted, but the sentence imposed did not comply with the indeterminate sentence law (Acts 33d Leg. c. 132), as it should have done, the clerk of the appellate court will be directed to enter the proper sentence, and the judgment, as reformed, will be affirmed.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 3199, 3200; Dec. Dig. § 1184.*]
    Appeal from District Court, Nacogdoches County; L. D. Guinn, Judge.
    E. D. Pullum was convicted of swindling, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   PRENDERGAST, P. J.

There, is no statement of facts. The indictment follows the statute and the approved forms, and properly charges the offense.

The sentence does not comply with the indeterminate sentence law. It should have done so. The clerk of this court will enter the proper order of sentence, and this judgment, as reformed, will be affirmed.