Case Name: Mrs. Lacy Whitcomb v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1916-12-20
Citations: 80 Tex. Crim. 446
Docket Number: No. 4249
Parties: Mrs. Lacy Whitcomb v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 80
Pages: 446–449

Head Matter:
Mrs. Lacy Whitcomb v. The State.
No. 4249.
Decided December 20, 1916.
1. —Vagrancy—Recognizance—Appeal Bond—Rule Stated.
An appeal in a misdemeanor case tried in the County Court, can only be perfected by entering into a recognizance in open court. Following Maxey v. State, 41 Texas Grim. Rep., 556, and other cases. An appeal bond will not answer the purpose of a recognizance, nor confer jurisdiction on the Court of Criminal Appeals. Following Palmer v. State, 63 Texas Grim. Rep., 614, and other cases, and where the appellant was convicted of vagrancy in the County Court, and filed an appeal bond, this court had no jurisdiction.
2. —Same—Recognizance—County Clerk—Nunc Pro Tunc—Minutes of the Court.
Where the county judge certified that he in fact took a recognizance, but that it was not entered in the minutes of the'court, and it appeared from the record that the lower court had adjourned and this court had dismissed the appeal, that the county clerk after adjournment of court, without permission of the court, added to the minutes of the court a copy of the instrument filed, this gave no jurisdiction to this court, even if the lower court ordered the bond entered nunc pro tunc. Following Quarles v. State, 37 Texas Grim. Rep., 362, and other cases.
3. —Same—Rule Stated—Recognizance.
In order to give this court jurisdiction, it is necessary not only that the recognizance be taken, but that such recognizance be entered of record during the term at which the appeal is taken. Following Knowlton v. State, 75 Texas Crim. Bep., 8.
Appeal from the County Court of Anderson. Tried below before the Hon. E. V. Swift.
Appeal from a conviction of vagrancy; penalty, a fine of two hundred dollars.
The opinion states the case.
Kay & Seagler, for appellant.
Cited Burton v. State 90 S. W. Rep., 498.
C. C. McDonald, Assistant Attorney General, and J. J. Strickland, County Attorney, for the State.

Opinion:
HABPEB, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of vagrancy in the County Court, from which 'judgment she prosecutes this appeal.
There are several bills of exception in the record, but the Assistant Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal on the ground that this court is without jurisdiction, and attaches to said motion the following certificate of the county clerk of Anderson County:
"I, J. I. Hopkins, clerk of the County Court in and for Anderson County, Texas, do hereby certify over my official signature and seal that in cause Ho. 7009, styled State of Texas v. Mrs. Lacey Whitcomb, in the County Court of Anderson County, Texas, and now on appeal in the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, do hereby certify that the appeal bond filed was never recorded in the minutes of the court; said bond is dated April 21, 1916, and is signed by Mrs. Lacy Whitcomb as principal and C. M. Kay, F. E. Dublin, and B. Y. Snaer as sureties; that this said appeal bond is the only bond ever filed by the said Mrs. Lacy Whitcomb and is the bond that the case was appealed on, and is the bond that was filed in my office and placed with the papers and copied into the transcript; that said bond was never recorded on the minutes of this court, and no bond in her case was ever recorded on •the minutes of this court, and no recognizance in her case was ever copied on the minutes of this court; and the above appeal bond dated April 21, 1916, was the only bond or recognizance tendered me, and the only bond of any description filed in this court after her conviction."
An appeal in a misdemeanor case, tried in the County Court, can only be perfected by entering into a recognizance in open court. Art. 920, Code of Criminal Procedure; Maxey v. State, 41 Texas Crim. Rep., 556; Quarles v. State, 37 Texas Crim. Rep., 362; Koritz v. State, 27 Texas Crim. App., 53. An appeal bond will not answer the purpose of a recognizance, nor confer jurisdiction on the Court of Criminal Appeals. Palmer v. State, 63 Texas Crim. Rep., 614; Herron v. State, 27 Texas, 337; Cook v. State, 8 Texas Crim. App., 671; Arnold v. State, 3 Texas Crim. App., 437; Bacon v. State, 10 Texas, 98; Savbly v. State, 83 S. W. Rep., 709. In Jones v. State, 1 Texas Crim. App., 485, an instrument of the character and kind shown by this record to have been executed by appellant is held to be an appeal bond and conferred no jurisdiction- on this court. For other decisions so holding see Bennett v. State, decided at the last sitting of this court.
The appeal is dismissed.
Dismissed.