Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

George MARSHALL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

OPINION

BELCHER, Judge.

The conviction is for the possession of marihuana; the punishment, fifty years.

The sole ground urged as error is that:

"The Indictment in this case is too vague, general, and indefinite to apprise
the defendant of the charge against him, and will not support a cinviction."

The indictment alleges that the appellant did "on or about the 24th day of August," 1968, "* * * unlawfully possess a narcotic drug, to-wit: marihuana."

No motion was made to quash the indictment.

The allegations of the indictment are sufficient to charge the offense of possession of marihuana. Willson's Tex.Crim.Forms 7th Ed. Sec. 942; 3 Branch 2d 355, Sec. 1423.2; Fawcett v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 127 S.W.2d 905; Fletcher v. State, 162 Tex.Crim. R., 282 S.W.2d 230; Gonzales v. State, 163 Tex.Crim. R., 293 S.W.2d 786; Gonzalez v. State, 168 Tex.Crim. 49, 323 S.W.2d 55.

The judgment is affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MARSHALL v. STATE
(Oct 9, 1968)