William Carlyle Drumm, Appellant v. the State of Texas, Appellee

Summary

The Court held that the trial court erred in overruling the appellant's motion to quash the information because the information failed to specify the particular subsection of Article 6687b, Sec. 24, under which the appellant's license was suspended, thereby depriving him of adequate notice to prepare a defense. Accordingly, the conviction was reversed and the prosecution dismissed. The Court overruled Grider v. State, finding its reasoning on pleading sufficiency inapplicable to the notice requirement. Justice Douglas dissented, arguing that the specific subsection is irrelevant and that the majority improperly overruled Grider.