Case Name: John Rupard v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1913-05-07
Citations: 71 Tex. Crim. 256
Docket Number: No. 2188
Parties: John Rupard v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 71
Pages: 256–259

Head Matter:
John Rupard v. The State.
No. 2188.
Decided May 7, 1913.
Rehearing denied June 25, 1913.
1. —Retailing Liquors Without License—Recognizance—Certiorari.
Where the appeal was dismissed for defective recognizance, whereupon an amended recognizance was filed, and the motion to grant a writ of certiorari to give appellant time to substitute the lost papers, after much delay, was finally complied with, but no error appeared of record, the cause is affirmed.
2. —Same—Practice on Appeal.
Where the bills of exception which were granted by the court presented no error, either on the facts admitted in evidence or as to the information, the cause must-be affirmed.
Appeal from the County Court of Dallas County at Law. Tried below before the Hon. W. F. Whitehurst.
Appeal from a conviction of selling intoxicating liquors without license; penalty, $1000 and three months confinement in the county jail.
The opinion states the case.
Brooks & Worsham and Barry Miller, for appellant.
C. E. Lane, Assistant Attorney-General, and Clark M. Mullican and Currie McGutcheon, for the State.

Opinion:
HARPER, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of the offense of selling intoxicating liquor without having obtained a license to engage in such business.
The recognizance is fatally defective and confers no jurisdiction on this court. However, if the recognizance was in such condition as to authorize this court to consider the record, there is no statement of facts accompanying it, and no bills of exception, reserving any exception to any of the proceedings had on the trial, and it would necessarily be affirmed, but as this court has no jurisdiction, it is ordered that the appeal be dismissed.
Dismissed.