Case Name: STAFFORD v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1926-02-10
Citations: 280 S.W. 218
Docket Number: No. 9853
Parties: STAFFORD v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 280
Pages: 218–219

Head Matter:
STAFFORD v. STATE.
(No. 9853.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Feb. 10, 1926.)
Guinn & Guinn, of Rusk, for appellant.
Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., of Austin, and Nat Gentry, Jr., Asst. State’s Atty., of Tyler, for the State.

Opinion:
BERRY, J.
The offense is possession of a still. The punishment is one year in the penitentiary.
The evidence on motion for new trial is certainly overwhelming, if not undisputed, that the district attorney agreed with counsel for defendant that he would recommend a suspended sentence, and in the event the jury failed to suspend the sentence, then appellant would be given a new trial. . Induced by this promise, appellant entered a plea of guilty. The jury gave him one year and refused to suspend sentence. Appellant contends that his plea of guilty was induced by persuasion, contrary to the statute. His contention must be sustained. The facts above stated fail to show a valid plea of guilty, but on the contrary they show a conviction obtained in a manner not sanctioned by law. Harris v. State, 17 Tex. App. 559; Saunders v. State, 10 Tex. App. 336; Wallace v. State, 10 Tex. App. 407; Frosh v. State, 11 Tex. App. 280.
The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.
PER CURIAM.' The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.