Case Name: GODBY v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1920-11-24
Citations: 227 S.W. 192
Docket Number: No. 5967
Parties: GODBY v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 227
Pages: 192–194

Head Matter:
GODBY v. STATE.
(No. 5967.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Nov. 24, 1920.
Rehearing Granted Jan. 12, 1921.)
I.Bail <&wkey;64 — Appeal dismissed for defective recognizance.
Where a recognizance is defective because not stating the offense -of which appellant was convicted nor the punishment assessed, and is otherwise not in the form prescribed by decisions and the statute (Vernon’s Ann. Code Cr. Proc. 1916, art. 903), the appeal must be dismissed.
. On Motion for Rehearing.
2. Bail <&wkey;>72 — Dismissal for defective recognizance set aside upon tiling of proper recognizance.
On motion for rehearing, where appeal in . criminal case was dismissed for defective recognizance, the judgment of dismissal may be set aside upon showing the filing of a proper recognizance, and the cause considered on its merits.
3. Criminal law <&wkey;>507(9) —■ Witness held an accomplice with defendant charged with perjury. .
A witness in a prosecution for perjury, who was a participant in the purchase of a car knowing it to be stolen and in the commission of the perjury, if any, committed by defendant, to cover up such transaction, is an accomplice.
4. Perjury i&wkey;34(l) — Facts held to show witness not “credible.”
An accomplice in perjury who under oath admitted giving directly contrary evidence in a civil trial, and whose reputation for truth and veracity was shown to be bad, and who had been convicted of a felony, is not a “credible witness” within Vernon’s Ann. Code Cr., Proc, 1916, art. 806, requiring the falsity of the statement assigned as the basis of a perjury case to be sworn to by two credible witnesses or by one strongly corroborated.
[Ed. Note. — For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and Second Series, Credible Witness.]
5. Perjury <&wkey;34(I) — Evidence held not to show witness credible as required to sustain conviction.
Evidence held, not to show that the statement assigned as the basis for the perjury charged was sworn to by two credible witnesses or by one such, strongly corroborated by other witness as to such falsity, as required by Vernon’s Ann. Code Cr. Proc. 1916, art. 806, to sustain a conviction.
Appeal from District Court, Parker County; F. O. McKinsey, Judge.
Lee Godby was convicted of perjury, and he appeals.
Dismissal of appeal set aside on rehearing, and cause reversed and remanded.
Jno. L. Poulter and Mays & Mays, all of Ft. Worth, and Preston Martin and J. E. Carter, both of Weatherford, for appellant.
Alvin M. Owsley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, J.
Appellant was convicted in the district court of Parker county of the offense of perjury, and his punishment fixed at six years' confinement in the penitentiary.
Our Assistant Attorney General moves to dismiss this appeal because of a defective recognizance, and an examination of same discloses that the motion is well taken. The recognizance appearing on page 61; of the transcript does not state the offense for which appellant was convicted nor the punishment assessed, and is otherwise not in the form prescribed by our statute and decisions. See article 903, Vernon's Code of Criminal Procedure; Watson v. State, 62 Tex. Cr. R. 620, 138 S. W. 611; White v. State, 68 Tex. Cr. R. 147, 151 S. W. 826.
The motion of the state is sustained, and the appeal dismissed.
®=»For other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes