Citations
- 294 S.W.2d 405
Full opinion text
MORRISON, Presiding Judge.,,
The offense is possession of'whiskey in a dry'area-for 'the purpose o'f :sale,''with p'rior convictions for offenses-' of -like ’char-mcter- alleged for* enhancement;'' the punishment, a-fine of $500h '- ’
Our able State’s Attorney has confessed error.
The bills of exception reflect that the original complaint and information were filed on January 26; 19S6, charging the appellant with the.primary offense. ..On Feb-r.uary 23 the county-.attorney filed a motion requesting permission to dismiss the information then on file and file a new information charging the primary offense and the two prior convictions. This permission was granted, and a new complaint and information were filed. We find no error, in the procedure so far; however, the bills reflect that thereafter and without notice the county attorney altered, the new complaint by changing the numbers which had been assigned to the prior convictions plead for énhancement. - "
In Phariss v. State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 504, 126 S.W.2d 981, we said that where the complaint was altered it ceased to be the act of the affiant and that the affiant him-sélf could not.have altered the .same .without.-being sworn- anew. See also Texas Digest, ..-Indictment and. Information, ’
The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.