Case ID: tex-crim_107/html/0003-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MORROW, Presiding Judge. —", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William Johnson v. The State.
    No. 10884.
    Delivered May 4, 1927.
    Transporting Intoxicating Liquor — Evidence — Not Objected to When Offered — Practice on Appeal.
    Where, on a trial for transporting intoxicating liquor, evidence that officers had searched appellant’s car, having been received without objection, complaint that officers made the search without a search warrant was not available after the evidence was admitted.
    Appeal from the District Court of Kaufman County. Tried below before the Hon. Joel R. Bond, Judge.
    
      Appeal from a conviction for transporting intoxicating liquor, penalty two years in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief filed for appellant.
    
      Sam D. Stinson, State’s Attorney, and Robert M. Lyles, Assistant State’s Attorney, for the State.
   MORROW, Presiding Judge. —

The offense is transporting intoxicating liquor, punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of two years.

The evidence is definite to the point that the appellant was transporting whiskey in an automobile.

There are no bills of exceptions complaining of the introduction of testimony. The evidence having been received without objection, the complaint that the officers searched the appellant’s car without a warrant is not tenable. To justify consideration on appeal of the receipt of evidence on the trial, objection and exception at that time and presentation by bill of exceptions is essential.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.