Case Name: T. N. Harris v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1910-02-16
Citations: 58 Tex. Crim. 523
Docket Number: No. 431
Parties: T. N. Harris v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 58
Pages: 523–525

Head Matter:
T. N. Harris v. The State.
No. 431.
Decided February 16, 1910.
Rehearing March 23, 1910.
1. —Carrying Pistol—Information—Disjunctive.
An information which charged the defendant with unlawfully carrying on or about his person a pistol, instead of using the phrase “on and about,” is fatally defective. Following Hart v. State, 2 Texas Crim. App., 39, and other cases.
2. —Same—Recognizance—Fine Assessed—Practice on Appeal.
Where, upon appeal from a misdemeanor, the recognizance failed to state the punishment assessed against the appellant in the court below, and recited that he was charged with carrying on or about his person a pistol, the same was fatally defective.
Appeal from the County Court of Holán. Tried below before the Hon. John J. Ford.
Appeal from a conviction of unlawfully carrying a pistol; penalty, a fine of $100.
The opinion states the case.
Ho brief on file for appellant,
John A. Mobley, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
Cited May v. State, 40 Texas Crim. Rep., 196.

Opinion:
DAVIDSOn, Presiding Judge.
Appellant was convicted of unlawfully carrying a pistol, his punishment being assessed at a fine of $100.
The charging part of the information is as follows: ". . . did then and there unlawfully carry on or about his person a pistol, against the peace and dignity of the State." This information is subject to demurrer in that it charges the offense in the alternative "on or about." The allegation could have been made and should have been made by the use of the conjunctive "and" instead of the disjunctive "or." This character of pleading has been held vicious since the case of Hart v. State, 2 Texas Crim. App., 39. See also Tompkins v. State, 4 Texas Crim. App., 161; Burrows v. State, 17 S. W. Rep., 257; Parker v. State, 20 S. W. Rep., 707; Wells v. State, 21 S. W. Rep., 370; Young v. State, 42 S. W. Rep., 564; Walker v. State, 32 Texas Crim. Rep., 517; Davis v. State, 23 Texas Crim. App., 637. These are a sufficient number of cases to indicate the unbroken line of authority.
The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.
Reversed and remanded.