Case Name: McCALLAN v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1929-03-27
Citations: 15 S.W.2d 1049
Docket Number: No. 12417
Parties: McCALLAN v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 15
Pages: 1049–1050

Head Matter:
McCALLAN v. STATE.
(No. 12417.)
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
March 27, 1929.
Levens & Burks and John L. Ratliff, all of Lubbock, for appellant.
A. A. Dawson, State’s Atty;, of Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
MARTIN, J.
Appellant was charged in the county court of Lubbock county with misdemeanor theft.
The judgment of conviction reads as follows: "10/2/28. Trial by Jury, Verdict of Guilty, 30 days in jail and $100.00 fine. J. H. Rhea, Foreman."
Articles 783 and 784, C. C. P. 1925, read as follows: •
Article 783: "When the defendant is only-fined the judgment shall be that the State of Texas recover of the defendant the amount of such fine and all costs of the prosecution, and that the defendant, if present, be committed to jail until such fine and costs are paid; or if the defendant be not present, that a capias forthwith issue, commanding the sheriff to arrest the defendant and commit him to jail until such fine and costs are paid; also, that execution may issue against the property of such defendant for the amount of such fine and costs."
Article 784: "If the punishment is any other than a fine, the judgment shall specify it, and order it enforced by the proper process. It shall -also adjudge the costs against the defendant, and order the collection thereof as in other cases."
This purported judgment fails to comply with the terms laid down by the statute for a judgment, and is not such a final judgment as will support an appeal to this court. The-one exhibited above is in fact no' judgment. For collation of authorities, see Vernon's C. C. P. art. 783, and notes. See, also, Donegan v. State, 89 Tex. Cr. R. 193, 230 S. W. 166.
Our state's attorney has moved to dismiss the appeal because no final judgment was entered, and, for the reasons heretofore pointed out, such motion is granted and the appeal dismissed.
PER CURIAM. The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court. ,