
    HOLLAND v. STATE.
    (No. 6509.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Nov. 30, 1921.)
    Criminal law @=315 — Where law is repealed before judgment becomes final, conviction will be dismissed.
    Where the sole count in an indictment charged, and defendant was convicted of, unlawful possession of equipment for making intoxicating liquor, and the phase of the statute denouncing such offense was omitted in amending the law (Acts 37th Leg. [1921] First and Second Called Sess. c. 61), the conviction will be reversed and prosecution dismissed, in obedience to Pen. Code 1911, art. 16, exempting from punishment those offending against a law subsequently repealed before the judgment becomes final.
    Appeal from District Court, Angelina County; L. D. Guinn, Judge.
    Ben Holland was convict'ed of having, unlawful possession of equipment for making intoxicating liquor, and appeals.
    Reversed, and prosecution dismissed.
    Fairchild & Redditt, of Lufkin, for appellant.
    R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   MORROW, P. J.

The sole count in the indictment charged, and the appellant was convicted of, the unlawful possession of equipment for making intoxicating liquor. The phase of the statute denouncing this offense having been omitted in amending the law on the subject, it becomes necessary, in obedience to article 16 of the Penal Code, exempting from punishment those offending against a law subsequently repealed before the judgment becomes final, to order that the judgment be reversed and the prosecution dismissed. Chapter 61, Laws of tbe 37th Leg., First and Second Called Sessions; Frank Cox v. State, 234 S. W. 531, recently decided.  