Case Name: G. L. Searcy v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1899-10-18
Citations: 40 Tex. Crim. 460
Docket Number: No. 1967; No. 1967; No. 1967
Parties: G. L. Searcy v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 40
Pages: 460–464

Head Matter:
G. L. Searcy v. The State.
No. 1967.
On Motion for Certiorari, Decided April 26, 1899.
No. 1967.
On Merits, Decided June 21, 1899.
No. 1967.
On Rehearing, Decided October 18, 1899.
1. Certiorari to Perfect Record.
■See opinion for valid objections to a transcript on appeal, on account of which a certiorari is awarded requiring the clerk to prepare and forward a perfect one in accordance with law, and adjudging the costs against said clerk.
ON THE MERITS.
2. Sunday Law—Constitutional Law—Class Legislation.
Our Sunday law, Penal Code, articles 199, 200, denouncing a penalty for selling goods on Sunday, but exempting certain characters of business and sales from the operation of the law, is not class legislation, because the Legislature is authorized, under its police power, to exempt certain articles of merchandise as common necessities', the sale of which should not be prohibited.
3. Selling Liquor on Sunday.
Whisky, when not sold as a medicine, or by a druggist, on Sunday, is regarded as a beverage, and comes within the inhibitions of the statute.
4. Construction of Statutes.
Where a statute is even of doubtful import, it is the duty of the court to give it that construction which will uphold its constitutionality.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
5. Construction of Statute, Article 1018, Penal Code, as to Additional Process for Witnesses.
Penal Code, article 1012, inhibiting clerks from issuing further process where witness has been served with process by one party, except upon order of the judge, etc., applies only in felony cases; it has no application to misdemeanors.
6. Continuance—Witness of Opposite Party.
Where an application of defendant for continuance is based upon process sued out for a witness by the State, the application must connect the defendant seeking the continuance with the original process; and the process should show the fact that at the time it was issued the defendant also desired the witness.
7. Same.
A continuance will be held to have been properly refused where in the face of the record it is not probably true that the witness would testify as stated in the application, or if he did, that an honest jury would not believe his testimony.
Appeal from the County Court of Karnes. Tried below before Hon. F. Theo. Barnes, County Judge.
Appeal from a conviction for selling a bottle of whisky on Sunday; penalty, a fine of $30.
Graves & Bell, for appellant.
Robt. A. John, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

Opinion:
BROOKS, Judge.
The Assistant Attorney-General has filed the following motion for writ of certiorari:
1. Now comes the State of Texas, by the Assistant Attorney-General, in the above styled and numbered cause, and shows to the court that the transcript filed herein is imperfect in this:
That it fails to comply with rule 114 for the district courts of this State,- which apply and control the making of transcripts herein, in that the same is not legible.
2. The State would show to the court, that on page 2 of said transcript, what purports to he a copy of the indictment is written by a typewriter, and that same is so dim that the letters and figures of the same are not discernible and absolutely unintelligible. That on page 3 of said transcript, wherein the motion to quash is supposed to be transcribed, and page 4, wherein the judgment rendered against appellant is supposed to be transcribed, and pages 6 and 7 of the statement of facts, are absolutely unintelligible.
3. That said transcript is imperfect, for the reason that the same is not certified to properly by the clerk of the County Court of Karnes County, to wit, Wm. I. Mayfield, in this: That- the signature of said clerk to said certificate is a typewritten signature, and is not the signature of said clerk.
Wherefore he prays that a certiorari forthwith issue from this court commanding the clerk of the County Court of Karnes County to for ward to the clerk of this court a perfect transcript of the record in this case in accordance with the law.
We have examined what purports to be the transcript, and find that the Assistant Attorney-General's criticism of the same is correct. There are whole pages of the transcript that can not be read at all. The motion is sustained; and we therefore order that the writ of certiorari do forthwith issue, directed to the clerk of the County Court of Karnes County, Texas, commanding him to prepare and forward to this court a perfect transcript of the record in this cause in accordance with law.
Costs will be awarded against the clerk of the County Court of Karnes County.