Case Name: Billie Rodger FLORENCE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1954-11-03
Citations: 273 S.W.2d 631
Docket Number: No. 27139
Parties: Billie Rodger FLORENCE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 273
Pages: 631–632

Head Matter:
Billie Rodger FLORENCE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
No. 27139.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas,
Nov. 3, 1954.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 15, 1954,
No attorney on appeal for appellant.
Howard M. Fender, Crim. Dist. Atty., Eugene D. Biddle, Hugh F. King, Conard Florence/ Asst. Dist. Aftys., Fort' Worth, Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
WOODLEY, Judge.
The conviction is for aggravated assault with a motor vehicle; the punishment, one year in'jail.-
Appellant eomplai-ns of the overruling of hid motion- to quash the information.- The. information alleged .that appellant "did drive and operate a motor vehicle, to-wit:an aut_obile", while- the complaint alleged that he drove, and operated "a motor vehicle;, tor-wit: an- aut_mobile".
Bad spelling • will not- vitiate the complaint or 'information if the sense is not affected and the meaning cannot' be mistaken. Graham v. State, 119 Tex.Cr.R. 14, 46 S.W.2d 709; Murphey v. State, 109 Tex.Cr.R. 524, 5 S.W.2d 988.
The .complaint and information each show the misspelling of the word automobile, but it clearly appears that it was meant in each instance to allege that the motor vehicle was an automobile. No variance is therefqre shown.
There is no statement of facts, in the absence of which the remaining bill cannot be appraised.
The judgment is affirmed.