Case Name: REYNOLDS v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1917-11-28
Citations: 198 S.W. 958
Docket Number: No. 4611
Parties: REYNOLDS v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 198
Pages: 958–959

Head Matter:
REYNOLDS v. STATE.
(No. 4611.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Nov. 28, 1917.)
1. DISORDERLY HOUSE &wkey;>12 — INDICTMENT and Information &wkey;>122(5) — Keeping Disorderly House — Assignation Houses.
A complaint that defendant kept a house to be used by “men for the purpose of meeting by mutual appointment made by another for the purpose of sexual intercourse” does not state an offense, and is a variance from information charging it was done for the purpose of men and women meeting for such intercourse.
2. Indictment and Information <&wkey;41(2)— Information — Necessity for Valid Complaint.
Without a valid complaint an information is worthless.
3. Indictment and Information &wkey;»l — Necessity for Information — Disorderly House.
The information is a prereouisite to a prosecution in the county court for keeping a disorderly house for the purpose of men and women meeting for sexual intercourse.
4. Criminal Law <&wkey;878(2) — Defective Information — General Verdict.
Where one of several counts in an information is invalid for not being supported by the complaint, and the evidence tends to support the offense attempted to be charged in such count, and there is a general verdict, a conviction -will be set aside.
Appeal from Wichita County Court, Harvey Harris, Judge.
Mrs. A. C. Reynolds was convicted of keeping a disorderly house, and she appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
W. Lindsay Bibb, of Wichita Palls, for appellant. E. B. Hendricks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
DAVIDSON, P. J.
Appellant was charged in two counts with keeping a disorderly house — the evidence indicates that if anything it was an assignation house. The complaint charges that she kept this house and permitted it to be used by men for the purpose of meeting by mutual appointment made by another for the purpose of sexual intercourse. The information charges that it was done for the purpose of men and women meeting for such intercourse. This count in the information was attacked; the court overruled. There is a clear variance between the complaint and information. The Legislature has as yet not denounced a punishment for men to' meet at assignation houses for such immoral purposes. It has confined its enactment to the meeting of men and women for such purpose. The complaint charges no violation of the law, while the information charges one that could be. Without a valid complaint the information is worthless. The information is a prerequisite to a prosecution in the county court for this offense. This count will be quashed, as it should have been in the lower court. This count was submitted along with the other count. The evidence rather tends to support the meeting of men and women at the house by mutual appointment. The verdict was general.
The judgment will be reversed and remanded.
(fe=jFor other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes