Case Name: COVINGTON v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1926-02-17
Citations: 280 S.W. 789
Docket Number: No. 9897
Parties: COVINGTON v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 280
Pages: 789–789

Head Matter:
COVINGTON v. STATE.
(No. 9897.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Feb. 17, 1926.)
Dial & Brim, of Sulphur Springs, for appellant.
Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., of Austin, and Nat Gentry, Jr., Asst. State’s Atty., of Tyler, for the State.

Opinion:
BERRY, J.
The offense is refusal to provide for the support and maintenance of appellant's wife, and the punishment is a fine of $25.
The information, omitting formal parts, charges that—
"On or about the 31st day of March A. D. 1924, in the county and state aforesaid, did unlawfully and without justification neglect and refuse to provide for the support and maintenance of Sallie Covington. "
The appellant made a motion to quash this information because it does not charge that the act or refusal to provide for the support and maintenance of the wife was willfully done. In order to convict a husband under this statute, he must not only desert his wife, or fail to support her, as the case may be, ibut it must be willfully done. Dickey v. State, 198 S. W. 310, 82 Tex. Cr. R. 154; Terrell v. State, 228 S. W. 240, 88 Tex. Cr. R. 599; Windham v. State, 192 S. W. 248, 80 Tex. Cr. R. 551; Verse v. State, 193 S. W. 303, 81 Tex. Cr. R. 48; Lamm v. State, 210 S. W. 209, 85 Tex. Cr. R. 48; Wallace v. State, 210 S. W. 206, 85 Tex. Cr. R. 91.
It being essential to the state's case that proof be made that the failure to support the wife was willfully done, it follows that the information should have charged that the offense was willfully committed. The information failing in this respect, the motion to quash the same should have been sustained, and, for court's error in refusing to do so, the judgment is reversed, and the prosecution is ordered dismissed.
PER CIJRIAM. The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.