Court Opinion

ID: 9641310
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 17:28:21.602758+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:36.525586
License: Public Domain

STATE’S MOTION FOR REHEARING
ODOM, Judge
(dissenting).
The State’s motion for rehearing has been overruled without written opinion.
On original submission these judgments were reversed because the bonds did not designate a proper court where the principal was to appear.
We now have been furnished a supplemental transcript which includes docket sheet entries in the three causes involved. The docket sheet entries affirmatively show that on November 19, 1971, Wanda Harman, the principal, appeared in the 104th District Court of Taylor County, and was duly arraigned, with attorney present, “and on plea of not guilty case set for trial on 3/13/72.” The next entry on the docket sheet shows that the bonds were forfeited on June 5, 1972.
In Landrum v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 106, 345 S.W.2d 752, this court stated:
“ . . . all that is required is that the principal know where and in what court he was to appear. This he clearly did.”
It is now clear that the principal in the case at bar knew when and in what court she was to appear.
I would grant the State’s motion for rehearing, set aside the reversal, and affirm the judgment.
I respectfully dissent.
MORRISON, J., joins in this dissent.