Case Name: J. M. Cryer v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1896-11-05
Citations: 36 Tex. Crim. 621
Docket Number: No. 1310
Parties: J. M. Cryer v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 36
Pages: 621–623

Head Matter:
J. M. Cryer v. The State.
No. 1310.
Decided November 5th, 1896.
Motion for Rehearing Decided December 22nd, 1896.
1. Recognizance on Appeal—Sufficiency.
Unless a recognizance on appeal binds the appellant “to abide the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals of the State of Texas in this case,” it is wholly insufficient.
ON MOTION EOR REHEARING.
3. Same—Rehearing.
Where an appeal has been dismissed for want of a sufficient recognizance, the dismissal will be set aside and a rehearing granted, where it shown that the recognizance was in fact sufficient, and that the clerk made a mistake of omission in copying it into the record.
3. Injuring Stock in Inclosure When Fence is Insufficient—Plea of Former Acquittal.
On a prosecution for wilfully maiming and wounding an animal in an inclosure surrounded by an insufficient fence, brought under Art 799, Penal Code, the defendant pleaded former acquittal on a prosecution for wilfully and wantonly maiming and injuring the animal brought under provisions of Art. 787, Penal Code, it being the same transaction; and, the court instructed the jury that the plea of former acquittal was not good because the offenses were different. Held: The instruction was erroneous.
4. Same—Wounding and Killing Stock—Prosecutions Under Articles 787 and 799.
A party can be prosecuted and convicted under Art. 787, for wilfully and wantonly killing, etc., an animal without any regard to where it was at the time it was killed, etc., even though it may have been in a cultivated inclosure surrounded with an insufficient fence. And a party can be prosecuted and convicted under Art. 799, whether the act was wilfully or wantonly done or not, but if wilfully and wantonly done whether in an inclosure or not the party can be convicted under Art. 787. Overruling, Payne v. State, 17 Tex. Crim. App., 40; McRay v. State, 18 Tex. Crim. App., 331; Brewer v. State, 28 Tex. Crim. App., 565.
5. Same—Indictment, Suggestion as to.
In all cases of killing, etc., animals, the court suggests, that the indictment should have a count drawn under both the Articles 787 and 799.
Appeal from the County Court of Tyler. Tried below before Hon. M. Dies, County Judge.
Appeal from a conviction for unlawfully and wilfully maiming and wounding a mare within the enclosure of defendant, surrounded with an insufficient fence; penalty, a fine of §10. The appeal was dismissed on motion of the Assistant Attorney-General for defect in the recognizance. This defect was afterwards supplied and cured by certiorari, and the judgment of dismissal set aside and rehearing granted. On the rehearing, the appeal is disposed of on the alleged error in the charge of the court as to defendant’s plea of former acquittal, and a general statement of the case becomes unnecessary. The matters pertaining to the plea of former acquittal are sufficiently illustrated in the opinion.
R. E. Moore, for appellant.
Mann Trice, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

Opinion:
HURT, Presiding Judge.
Appellant was convicted of malicious mischief, and appeals. Motion is made by the Assistant Attorney-General to dismiss the appeal because of the insufficiency of the recognizance. The recognizance binds the appellant "to abide the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals," but fails to conclude as the statute requires, "in this case." The legislature has prescribed the form for recognizances in appeals to this court, and they have provided that it shall bind the appellant "to abide the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals of the State of Texas, in ihis case." Code Crim. Proc., 1895, Art. SSÍ. It is further provided that, unless this form is substantially complied with, the jurisdiction of this court shall not attach. This recognizance does not bind appellant to appear before the trial court to abide the judgment of this court "in this case." Under the form prescribed, we are of opinion that the motion is well taken, and the recognizance is insufficient. The appeal is therefore dismissed.
Dismissed.