Case Name: James Watson v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1911-06-21
Citations: 62 Tex. Crim. 620
Docket Number: No. 1225
Parties: James Watson v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 62
Pages: 620–622

Head Matter:
James Watson v. The State.
No. 1225.
Decided June 21, 1911.
1. —Adultery—Fornication—Recognizance—Reinstatement.
Where a sufficient recognizance was properly filed after the dismissal of the appeal, on account of a defective recognizance, the appeal will be reinstated.
2. —Same—Married Woman—Unmarried Woman—Variance.
Where, upon trial of adultery and fornication, charging the parties with living together and having carnal intercourse with each other, the woman being unmarried, the evidence showed that the woman was married, the variance was fatal, although the woman’s testimony as to her marriage was not corroborated; there being no evidence by the State that she was unmarried.
Appeal from the County Court of Ellis. Tried below before the Hon. J. C. Lumpkins.
Appeal from a conviction of adultery; penalty, a fine of $50.
The opinion states the case.
Amzi Carothers, for appellant.
Cited Whitaker v. State, 12 Texas Crim. App., 436; O’Mealy v. State, 1 Texas Crim. App., 180; Wolfforth v. State, 31 Texas Crim. Rep., 387; Goode v. State, 16 Texas Crim. App., 411; Foster v. State, 8 Texas Crim. App., 248; Wells v. State, 9 Texas Crim. App., 160; Cosgrove v. State, 37 Texas Crim. Rep., 249, 39 S. W. Rep., 367; Pena v. State, 46 Texas Crim. Rep., 458, 80 S. W. Rep., 1014.
C. E. Lane, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

Opinion:
DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.
The recognizance is deficient in that it fails to state the amount of the punishment or its character. This omission from the recognizance renders it fatally defective, and requires a dismissal of the appeal. The appeal is dismissed.
Dismissed.