Case Name: WIMBISH v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1925-11-11
Citations: 276 S.W. 1107
Docket Number: No. 9887
Parties: WIMBISH v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 276
Pages: 1107–1108

Head Matter:
WIMBISH v. STATE.
(No. 9887.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Nov. 11, 1925.)
Herman G. Nami, of Cuero, for appellant.,
Sam D. Stinson, State's Atty., of Green-ville, and Nat Gentry, Jr., Asst. State’s Atty., of Tyler, for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, J.
This is an appeal from a conviction in the district court of De Witt county for cattle theft, with punishment fixed at four years in the peniteniary. The record is before us without any bills of exception or statement of facts, and the charge of the court appears to correctly present the-law of the case as pleaded in the indictment.
Our attention is called to the judgment, which, after reciting the verdict, in which the jury fixed the penalty at four years' confine ment, proceeds to adjudge the defendant guilty, and that he- be punished by confinement in the state penitentiary for a term Of "not less than two nor more than four years," etc. Our indeterminate sentence law has no reference to judgments, and a judgment should not undertake to follow the provisions of said law, but should follow the verdict of the jury, and adjudge the accused guilty, when so found, and that he be confined in the penitentiary for the definite period fixed by the verdict. The purpose and effect of the law above referred to is that, in passing sentence upon the accused so found guilty, the punishment shall be stated in the sentence as not less than the minimum penalty nor more than that fixed by the jury. The sentence in this case is in conformity with said law.
The judgment of the court will be reformed, so as to fix the punishment of the appellant at confinement in the state penitentiary for a term of four years, and, as reformed, the judgment will be affirmed.*