Case Name: SIMPSON v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1912-11-20
Citations: 151 S.W. 303
Docket Number: 
Parties: SIMPSON v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 151
Pages: 303–303

Head Matter:
SIMPSON v. STATE.
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Nov. 20, 1912.)
1. Criminal Law (§ 1028 ) — Appeal and Er-boe — Presentation and Reservation of Grounds — Proceedings on Motion to Quash Indictment.
Where a motion to quash an indictment was verbal, and it was not argued by the defendant’s attorney and the county attorney in open court, and ruled on by the court in open court, no question of its insufficiency is presented for review.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, 'Cent. Dig. §§ 2619, 2620; Dec. Dig. § 1028. ]
2. Intoxicating Liquors (§ 236 ) — Criminal • Prosecutions — Gift of Liquor to Minor —Evidence.
In a prosecution for giving intoxicating liquor to a minor without the consent of his parent or guardian, evidence held insufficient to sustain a conviction.
■ [Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Intoxicating Liquors, Cent. Dig. §§ 309-322; Dec. Dig. § 236. ]
■ Appeal from Scurry County Court; Fritz R. Smith, Judge.
Whitcomb Simpson was convicted of giving intoxicating liquors to a minor, and appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
For other oases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
DAVIDSON, P. J.
The indictment charged appellant "with unlawfully giving and delivering, and causing to be given and delivered, and was concerned in the gift ánd delivery of, spirituous, vinous, malt, and intoxicating liquor to Jenkins De Shazo, the said Jenkins De Shazo then and there being a person under the age of 21 years1, without the written consent of the parent or guardian of the said," without mentioning the name of the minor after the word "said." Verbal motion was made to quash the indictment. The court signs the bill with the statement that defendant' made his motion orally, and same was not argued by his attorney and the county attorney in open court, and ruled on by the court in open court. We deem it unnecessary to review this question in the light of-this record.
The serious questipn is the want of sufficient evidence to justify the conviction. The alleged minor testified: "I live near Camp Springs, in Scurry county. I was at Mr. Jones' on or about the 1st day of March, 1911; was there at a gathering. While there I met and saw the defendant. While there the defendant and I went out in the yard, and outside of the yard gate. The defendant had a bottle of whisky. He went to where there was a post near the yard gate, picked up something and held it to his mouth, and then set it down by a post and stepped back some distance. I picked up what proved to be a bottle of whisky and took a drink out of it and set it back where I found it. We were standing near each other when we drank the whisky. The defendant did not give me any intoxicating liquor. He did not tell me where I could find any. When he set whatever it was down and stepped off, I just went and picked it up and got a drink and set it back down where I found it. He did not ask me to have a drink; nor did he tell me where it was." The father of the minor testified that he was under 21 years of age, at least was on March 1,1911, but would soon be 21 years of age. These were the only witnesses who testified in the case; defendant offering no evidence. We are of opinion, under this state of facts, that this conviction cannot be sustained.
The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.