Case Name: Dan Cotton v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1923-03-07
Citations: 94 Tex. Crim. 391
Docket Number: No. 7101
Parties: Dan Cotton v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 94
Pages: 391–392

Head Matter:
Dan Cotton v. The State.
No. 7101.
Decided March 7, 1923.
Rehearing Denied May 16, 1923.
1. —Manufacturing Intoxicating Liquor — Companion Case.
Where the legal questions raised were identical and called for the same disposition here as in the companion case, and the facts are the same, there is no necessity for an additional discussion, and the judgment is affirmed.
2. —Rehearing—Indictment—Sufficiency of Evidence.
Where, upon trial of unlawfully manufacturing intoxicating liquor, the indictment followed approved precedent, the same is sufficient and the facts supporting the allegations therein, there is no reversible error.
3. —Same—Argument of Counsel — Requested Charge.
Where the bills of exceptions to the refusal of requested charges did not show in what connection the language of the prosecuting attorney was made, there is no reversible error.
Appeal from the District Court of Coleman. Tried below before the Honorable J. O. Woodward.
Appeal from a conviction of manufacturing intoxicating liquor; penalty, one year in the penitentiary.
Baker & Weatherred, for appellant.
R. G. Storey, Assistant Attorney General for the State.

Opinion:
HAWKINS, Judge.
Conviction is for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor, with punishment, of one year in the penitentiary. This is a companion ease to No. 7100, James Hendley v. State, this day decided. The legal questions raised are identical, and call for the same disposition here as in that case. The facts are the same. No necessity exists for additional discussion.
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.