Case Name: DAVIS v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1920-05-05
Citations: 225 S.W. 532
Docket Number: No. 5777
Parties: DAVIS v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 225
Pages: 532–536

Head Matter:
DAVIS v. STATE.
(No. 5777.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
May 5, 1920.
Appeal Reinstated and Judgment Affirmed Nov. 24, 1920.)
1. Criminal law <@=>l 104(2) — Appeal dismissed where caption of transcript does not indicate date of trial.
Where the caption of transcript on appeal in a criminal case does not state year the case was tried or dates of the term of court, appeal will be dismissed.
On Motion for Rehearing.
2. Statutes <@=>16(2) — Bill may be corrected by concurrent resolution before signature.
The clerical correction of changing “or” to “and” in a legislative bill may be made by concurrent resolution, at least previous to the signature of the bill.
3. Statutes <@=364(19) — Defective title only partly invalidates law.
Under the express provision of Const, art. 3. § 35, an act containing matters not included within the caption is void only as to the extraneous provisions provided they are separable from the others.
4. Statutes <@=>107(1) — Constitutional provision regarding title liberally construed.
Const, art. 3, § 35, restricting legislative acts to a single subject, will be liberally construed, and where the provisions are germane in any degree the law will be upheld.
5. Statutes <@=>l 18(3)— Pool table law may include billiards:
Acts 36th Leg. (1919) c. 14, entitled an act to prohibit pool halls, etc., does not violate Const, art. 3, § 35, restricting laws to a single subject to be expressed in the title because it defines pool halls to include places where billiard table are used.
6. Statutes <@=>126 — Contradictory words of title of statute defining pool hall disregarded as surplusage.
Acts 36th Leg. (1919) c. 14, entitled an act to prohibit pool halls, etc., and defining pool halls to be any place where games similar “or dissimilar” to pool are played, the quoted words may be disregarded as surplusage.
Appeal from Bell County Court; M. B. Blair, Judge.
J. A. Davis was convicted of conducting a pool hall, and appeals.
Affirmed.
Williams & Williams, of Waco, and Black & Smedley, of Austin, for appellant.
C. M. Cureton, Atty. Gen., E. F. Smith, and Alvin M. Owsley, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, J.
The caption of the transcript of this case is as follows:
"The State of Texas, County of Bell.
"At the February term of the county court, begun and holden at Belton, within and for the county of Bell, before the Honorable M. Blair, county judge, the following case, among others, came on for trial, to wit: The State of Texas v. J. A. Davis. No; 566." B.
It is impossible for us to tell whether the transcript, of which the foregoing is the caption, contains the record of the trial during any particular year, as no date appears anywhere in the caption; nor is it there stated when the term of the court began and ended. This court suffers so continually from the carelessness of the officials charged with the duty of repairing transcripts that its limit of patience is almost reached. It seems that calling attention in opinions, to such matters, has little effect. The rules of practice with regard to these matters are well understood, and there is no excuse for the delay and expense incident to the necessary correction of such errors.
The appeal is dismissed.
©=>For other cases see same topic and ICEY-NUMBBR in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes