Case Name: FULGHAM et al. v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1930-06-25
Citations: 29 S.W.2d 791
Docket Number: No. 13575
Parties: FULGHAM et al. v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 29
Pages: 791–791

Head Matter:
FULGHAM et al. v. STATE.
No. 13575.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
June 25, 1930.
John D. Reese, of McKinney, for appellants.
A. A. Dawson, State’s Atty., .of Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
CHRISTIAN, J.
• The offense is operating a moving picture show on Sunday; the punishment, a fine of $50.
It was alleged in the complaint and information that appellants were "proprietor, agent and employee of a place of public amusement," etc., which was kept open on Sunday and for admission to which a fee was charged.
There is no evidence in the record supporting the allegation that appellants were the proprietors of the picture show. On the contrary, the state's testimony shows that said parties were agents and not proprietors.
The complaint and information are defective, in that, in undertaking to charge appellants as "agent or employee," the principal or proprietor is not named. It was incumbent upon the state to name the principal or proprietor, or, if such party was not known, to so allege. Roy Brockman et al. v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 28 S.W.(2d) 821, delivered May 21, 1930.
The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.
PER OURIAM.
The foregoing opinion of the Commission. of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approve(j ⅛6 court.