Case Name: A. Stephens v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1912-05-01
Citations: 66 Tex. Crim. 359
Docket Number: No. 1742
Parties: A. Stephens v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 66
Pages: 359–360

Head Matter:
A. Stephens v. The State.
No. 1742.
Decided May 1, 1912.
Catching Fish—Eling Pleadings—Two Days.
The statutes granting two days in which defendant may prepare and file pleadings is mandatory. Article 578, Revised Code Criminal Procedure. Following Reed v. State, 31 Texas Crim. Rep., 35, and other cases.
Appeal from the County Court of Throckmorton. Tried below before the Hon. T. J. Wright.
Appeal from a conviction of unlawfully catching fish; penalty, a fine of $10.
The opinion states the case.
No brief on file for appellant.
C. E. Lane, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.—Cited cases in opinion.

Opinion:
DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.
The affidavit, which charges appellant with catching and taking fish from a pond and stream and by muddying, ditching and draining and by means of nets and seines, etc., was filed on the 12th day of October, 1911. The information was filed on the same day. The judgment of conviction was entered the same day.
Wlhen the case was called for trial appellant made a motion asking that he be allowed the two days provided by statute in which to prepare and file pleadings and make preparation for trial. This was refused by the court, and appellant was placed upon trial. The court signs the bill of exceptions with the statement that when this was done the defendant and his counsel declined to say whether or not time was needed to enable them to get ready for trial. His motion for the two days is all the notice the statute authorizes. The statute grants him two days time when he desires it. The statute is held to be mandatory by the authorities. This action of the court was-error. Article 578 of Revised Code of Criminal Procedure; Reed v. State, 31 Texas Crim. Rep., 35; Evans v. State, 36 Texas Crim. Rep., 32; Holden v. State, 44 Texas Crim. Rep., 382; McFadin v. State, 44 Texas Crim. Rep., 471; Whitesides v. State, 44 Texas Crim. Rep., 410; King v. State, 56 S. W. Rep., 926; Johnson v. State, 49 S. W. Rep., 618; Lightfoot v. State, 77 S. W. Rep., 792. These we deem sufficient number of authorities to support the contention of appellant and show error of the court.
The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.
Reversed and remanded.