Case Name: G. R. Goddard v. The State
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1883-10-10
Citations: 14 Tex. Ct. App. 566
Docket Number: No. 1506
Parties: G. R. Goddard v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Court of Appeals Reports
Volume: 14
Pages: 566–567

Head Matter:
[No. 1506.]
G. R. Goddard v. The State.
1. Information—Pleading.—It is an imperative statutory provision that an indictment or information shall allege the time of the commission of the offense alleged, and that it must he a date anterior to the filing of the indictment or information.
2. Same—Amendment.—Allegation in an indictment or information that the offense was committed at a time subsequent to the filing of the indictment or information is a defect which goes to the substance, and is not amendable. Nor can it be treated as a clerical mistake.
Appeal from the County Court of Van Zandt. Tried below before the Hon. J. S. Spinks, County Judge.
The opinion discloses the nature of the case. The punishment imposed by a verdict of guilty was a fine of fifty dollars.
Burge & Russell, for the appellant.
J. H. Burts, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Opinion:
Willson, Judge.
This conviction was had upon an information which charges that the defendant "on the fifteenth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-three," did unlawfully carry a pistol, etc. The information was filed June 28, 1883.
It is an imperative requirement of the law that the time of the commission of the offence must be alleged, and that it must be a date anterior to the filing of the information. (Code Crim. Proc., Art. 430; Joel v. The State, 28 Texas, 642; Nelson v. The State, 1 Texas Ct. App., 556; Blake v. The State, 3 Texas Ct. App., 149; Shoefereator v. The State, 5 Texas Ct. App., 207.)
However manifest it may appear that this defect in the infortion is a clerical mistake, it cannot be so treated by this court. "It is better that the judgment should be reversed, than to establish such a precedent, or encourage carelessness in the preparation" of indictments and informations. (Robles v. The State, 5 Texas Ct. App., 346.)
Because the information is defective, and because the defect is one of substance which cannot be amended (Drummond v. The State, 4 Texas Ct. App., 150), the judgment is reversed and the prosecution is dismissed.
Reversed and dismissed.
Opinion delivered October 10, 1883