
    McWilliams v. State.
    (No. 4203.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Oct. 18, 1916.)
    Indictment and Information <&wkey;176 — Oj-éense Committed After Complaint.
    One cannot be convicted of an offense shown by the evidence to have been committed after the filing of the complaint.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Indictment and Information, Cent. Dig. § 584; Dec. Dig. &wkey;176.]
    Appeal from Dallas County Court at Law; T. A. Work, Judge.
    Addie McWilliams was convicted, and appeals.
    Reversed and remanded.
    McCutcheon & Church, of Dallas, for appellant. C. C. McDonald, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   DAVIDSON, J.

Appellant was convicted of violating the pistol law, her punishment being assessed at 30 days’ imprisonment in the county jail.

It may be‘very seriously questioned whether or not the evidence would .sustain the conviction on the merits of the testimony; but, in view of another proposition, this is not discussed, inasmuch as the case may be more fully developed should there be another trial.

The ease will be reversed for the following reason: The affidavit charging the offense was made and filed on the 24th of the month. The evidence for the state, there being none for the defendant on this question, shows that the offense was committed on the 29th of the same month, or five days after tt;e filing of the complaint. The information, of course, follows the allegations of the complaint. A citizen cannot be convicted of an ofl'ense until the evidence shows that that offense was committed as charged. It would not do to hold that an offense committed five days after the complaint is filed could be sustained. Under our law a citizen cannot be convicted for future, but for past, offenses.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded. 
      <§x=oFor other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     