Case Name: HENSON v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1926-02-10
Citations: 280 S.W. 585
Docket Number: No. 9723
Parties: HENSON v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 280
Pages: 585–585

Head Matter:
HENSON v. STATE.
(No. 9723.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Feb. 10, 1926.)
C. A. Davies, of San Antonio, and Walter B. Stout and T. P. Morris, both of 'Stockdale, .for appellant.
Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., of Austin, and Nat Gentry, Jr., Asst. State’s Atty., of Tyler, for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, J.
This appeal is from conviction in the county court of Wilson county for violation of the election laws, with punishment fixed at a fine of $200.
We are met at the threshold of our consideration of this case by a jurisdictional question. The prosecution is upon indictment, which makes necessary the conclusion that same resulted from a grand jury investigation, and to have validity it must have been returned into the district court and been transferred by an order duly made by the judge of the district court to the county court. The record herein shows no transfer from any district court to the county court of Wilson county. Without such transfer the county court has no jurisdiction. The showing of jurisdiction is a necessity, without which this court cannot take cognizance of the case. Richardson v. State, 122 S. W. 560, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 285; Harris v. State, 121 S. W. 1116, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 84; Harper v. State, 207 S. W. 96, 84 Tex. Cr. R. 845.
The judgment of the trial court is reversed and remanded, with- instructions to the county court of Wilson county that, if no order appears to have been made transferring said case to said county court, this prosecution will be dismissed.