Case Name: GREEN v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1915-11-10
Citations: 179 S.W. 1191
Docket Number: No. 3737
Parties: GREEN v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 179
Pages: 1191–1192

Head Matter:
GREEN v. STATE.
(No. 3737.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Nov. 10, 1915.)
1. Criminal Haw <&wkey;>1092, 1102— Appeal — Statement op Facts and Bills op Exception-Time por Filing.
Where the term at which a criminal trial occurred adjourned on May 15th, a statement of facts filed July 29th, and bills of exception filed the next day, would be stricken and not considered.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2803, 2829, 2834-2861,2919; Dec. Dig. &wkey;1092, 1102.]
2. Criminal Law &wkey;>27 — Felonies and Misdemeanors — Intoxicating Liquors.
Under Acts 31st Leg. c. 35, providing that if any person shall sell any intoxicating liquor in any territory in which the sale of intoxicating .liquors .“has been prohibited” he shall be punished by confinement for not less than one nor more than three years, and Pen. Code 1911, art. 597, providing that if any person shall sell any intoxicating liquor in any county, etc., in -which the sale of intoxicating liquor “has been prohibited,” he shall be punished by fine and imprisonment for not less than 20 nor more than 60 days, and if any person shall sell any intoxicating liquor in any county, etc., in which the sale of intoxicating liquor “shall hereafter be prohibited,” he shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary for not less than one nor more than three years, it is a misdemeanor only to sell intoxicating liquors in territory where prohibition had been adopted prior to the act of 1909, and a felony to make such a sale in territory where prohibition was subsequently adopted, and there is no conflict between the two clauses of article 597.
[Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 29-31; Dec. Dig. <&wkey;27.]
Appeal from Matagorda County Court; Thomas H. Lewis, Special Judge.
J. H. Green was convicted of making a sale of intoxicating liquors in prohibition territory, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
See, also, 155 S. W. 210.
J. W. Conger, of Bay -City, for appellant. C. C. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
PRENDERGAST, P. J.
Appellant was convicted for making a sale of intoxicating liquor after prohibition was in force in Mat-agorda county, and assessed the lowest punishment prescribed by law for a misdemeanor.
The term of court at which this trial occurred adjourned on May 15, 1915. The statement of facts was not filed until July 29, following, and the bills of exceptions the next day. Hence the Assistant Attorney General's motion to strike all these out and not consider them must be sustained. Without these, the only question raised which we can consider is to the jurisdiction of the county court.
This prosecution was begun by complaint and information in the county court. The information alleges that the prohibition election in said county was ordered by the commissioners' court on March 16, 1907; that the election for prohibition carried; and thereupon the commissioners' court passed an order declaring the result and prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors in said county; that such order was published for four successive weeks as required by law; and that this offense was committed on October 4, 1912.
Prior to the Acts of 1909, p. 356, it was a misdemeanor only to sell intoxicating liquors in prohibition territory. Said act of 1909 made it a felony to sell in such territory. The revisers in 1911, in the first clause of article 597, P. G., which was enacted and adopted by the Legislature of that year, provided that, if any person shall sell intoxicating liquors in prohibition territory "in which the sale of intoxicating liquor has been pro* hibited under the laws of this state," he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by fine of not less than $25 nor more than $100, and by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 20 nor more than 60 days; and, in the second clause of said article, made it a felony for any person to sell in prohibition territory "in which the sale of intoxicating liquors shall hereafter be prohibited under the laws of this state."
It has been the uniform holding of this court in many cases, since the said act of 1909 was passed and the Revised Statutes adopted, that, as stated in said article 597, it was a misdemeanor only to make an illegal sale of intoxicating liquors in prohibition territory where prohibition had been adopted prior to the act of 1909, and a felony where adopted since the act of 1909, and that there is no conflict between the clauses1 of article 597; the first making it a misdemean- or and the latter a felony. So that, in this case, appellant's contention that the two clauses of the act conflict, and in effect therefore that neither, or only the felony clause, is in force, and also his contention that the county court had no jurisdiction, cannot be sustained. Lewis v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 351, 127 S. W. 808, 21 Ann. Cas. 656; Mealer v. State, 66 Tex. Cr. R. 140, 145 S. W. 353; Nobles v. State, 71 Tex. Cr. R. 123, 158 S. W. 1133; and other cases there cited.
The judgment is therefore affirmed.
<&wkey;>For other eases see same topic .and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes