Case ID: sw_239/html/1116-01.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

ODOM v. STATE.
    (No. 6924.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    April 26, 1922.)
    Criminal law <§=14 — Prosecution for possessing intoxicating liquors dismissed after amendment of statute.
    A prosecution for possessing intoxicating liquor which was begun under the law as it 'existed for passagé of Acts 37th Leg. (1921) 1st Called Sess. c. 61, amending Acts 36th Leg. (1919) 2d Called Sess. e. 78, §§' 1 and 2 (Vernon’s Ann. Pen. Code Supp. 1922, art. 588¼ et seq.), which provides that possession of liquor to constitute an offense must be so possessed for the purpose of sale will be dismissed.
    Appeal from District Court, Denton County; C. R. Pearman, Judge.
    Horace Odom was convicted of the possession of intoxicating liquor, and he appeals.
    Reversed and dismissed.
    R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   HAWKINS, J.

Appellant was convicted under an indictment charging the possession of intoxicating liquor, and his punishment assessed at one year’s confinement in the penitentiary.

The prosecution was begun under the law as it existed prior to the amendment of the First Called Session of the Thirty-Seventh Legislature, p. 233 (Vernon’s Ann. Code Supp. 1922, art. 588½ et seq.). By that amendment the possession of intoxicating liquor, to be a violation of the law, must be so possessed for the purpose of sale. Under many cases heretofore decided since the amendment in question, this court has held that the indictment in the present form does not charge a violation of the present law.

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