
    F. Coleman v. The State.
    No. 2031.
    Decided November 13, 1912.
    Robbery — Indictment.
    Where, upon trial of robbery the indictment followed approved precedent, there was no error.
    Appeal from the Criminal District Court of Galveston. Tried below before the Hon. Clay S. Briggs.
    Appeal from a conviction of robbery; penalty, fifteen years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the ease.
    
      O. S. York, for appellant.
    — On question of insufficiency of indictment: Murdock v. State, 52 Texas Crim. Rep., 262; Hineman v. State, 22 Texas Crim. App., 44; Hickman v. State, 22 id., 441.
    
      C. E. Lane, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
   DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.

— Appellant was convicted of robbery, and seems to rest his case upon one question, to wit, the insufficiency of the indictment in that it is duplicitous. The writer has disagreed with the majority of the court upon this question, in which they have held the character of indictment here set forth is not duplicitous. In accordance with the view, therefore, of the majority as announced in Green v. State, 66 Texas Crim. Rep., 446, 147 S. W. Rep., 593, which overrules Murdock v. State, 52 Texas Crim. Rep., 262, appellant’s contention can not be sustained. Under that authority the indictment is sufficient. It is unnecessary, we think, to review any other question in the record.

As presented the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.  