Case ID: sw_257/html/0541-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LATTIMORE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

McCULLOUGH v. STATE.
    (No. 7982.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Jan. 2, 1924.
    Rehearing Denied Jan. 30, 1924.)
    Municipal corporations &wkey;>707 —Automobile driver’s intoxication shown.
    Evidence held to support conviction of driving an automobile while drunk.
    Appeal from County Court at Law, No. 2, Dallas County; Wylie A. Bell, Judge.
    Sam McCullough was convicted of driving an automobile while drunk, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    W. E. Pinkston, of Dallas, for appellant.
    Tom Garrard, State’s Atty., of Midland, and Grover C. Morris, Asst. State’s Atty., of Devine, for the State.
   LATTIMORE, J.

Appellant • was convicted in the county court at law, No. 2, for Dallas county, of driving an automobile while in an intoxicated condition, and his punishment fixed at a fine of $75.

There is but one bill of exceptions in the record, which was filed too late to be considered. If considered, no error would appear. The facts stated seem to establish beyond question that the appellant is guilty of the offense charged. The complaint sufficiently charged the offense, and, no error appearing, an affirmance will be ordered.

On Motion for Rehearing.

Out of deference to appellant’s insistence that the facts do not show him to have driven a car on a public street while drunk, we state briefly such of the facts as might be deemed sufficient. Mr. Garrett drove his car to a point on a public street in the city of Dallas, and there parked it in front of a house. He went into the house. Presently he heard a crash outside and went at once out the front door. Appellant was sitting in a Ford roadster which had been driven into Mr. Garrett’s car. The windshield of appellant’s car was broken and his head cut and bleeding. He was too drunk too talk. These facts are not disputed. They show his guilt.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.