Court Opinion

ID: 9662331
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 23:05:58.523088+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:38.646295
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
DICE, Judge.
Appellant insists that the trial court should have sustained his motion to quash the indictment on the ground that it did not allege that the offense was committed in Nolan County, and here urges that it is fundamentally defective for such reason.
The indictment, in charging the offense, alleged in part that appellant "on or about the 17th day of October, A.D., 1954, * * * in the County of Nolan and State of Texas, in and upon Patricia *221Carter, a woman * * * did then and there” commit certain acts upon the said Patricia Carter.
The use of the words “then and there,” being words of reference, in the indictment, after the county and state had been named, was sufficient to allege that the offense was committed in Nolan County. Branch’s Ann. Texas P.C., p. 258, Sec. 502; Madkins v. State, 241 S.W. 2d 151; Heath v. State, 156 Texas Cr. R. 563, 244 S.W. 2d 815; Barnes v. State, No. 27,607, 161 Texas Cr. R. 510.
Appellant urges that reversible error is reflected by Paragraph 6 of the court’s charge wherein he told the jury that the minimum penalty for the offense of abortion, if committed without consent, was two years, whereas, under the law such minimum penalty is four years. We here observe that, since the jury found appellant guilty of abortion with consent, the penalty for which was properly charged, the charge on abortion committed without consent passed out of the picture, and the incorrect penalty stated and made applicable thereto became harmless.
We have again examined our original opinion in the light of the appellant’s motion for rehearing and remain convinced that a conviction for abortion with consent can be upheld under an indictment charging abortion without consent.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.
Opinion approved by the Court.