Case ID: sw_244/html/1007-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LATTIMORE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ex parte MARSHALL.
    (No. 7486.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Nov. 15, 1922.)
    1. Bail &wkey;>49 — Application for bail in homicide case should be granted, in absence of evidence of express malice or premeditation.
    An application for bail by one charged with murder should be granted, where the state shows nothing indicating express malice and rests its case on testimony failing to show that the killing was not on sudden impulse, the case being one for bail if the killing is without explanation, and there are no facts in the record leading to the conclusion that, on a trial before a fair jury, a capital conviction would result.
    2. Bail &wkey;»51 — Accused’s ability to give bond not considered in fixing amount.
    In fixing the amount of a bail bond, the court is governed, not alone by accused’s ability to give bond, but also by the gravity of the offense charged and the seriousness of the evidence in the record affecting guilt.
    Appeal from District Court, Tyler County; D. F. Singleton, Judge.
    Oscar Marshall was charged with murder, and, from an order refusing him bail, he appeals.
    Reversed and bail fixed.
    Coleman & Lowe, of Woodville, for appellant.
    R. <3. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   LATTIMORE, J.

Appellant brings before us his appeal from an order of the district court of Tyler county refusing him bail in a case wherein he is charged with murder.

• An inspection of the statement of facts on file in this case makes it plain that while the circumstances and situation establish the fact that appellant killed the deceased, it is also clear that no one saw the shooting. Witnesses testify who saw the parties just before and just after the shooting, and it appears also that shotgun shells, apparently used in the gun of appellant in killing the deceased, were found 10 or 15 feet from the body of deceased. No weapon was found upon the body of deceased or around him. Several witnesses testified that after the shooting appellant admitted to them that he killed deceased. Coupled with each of the statements made by him to the witnesses who so testified was some exculpatory statement. In the testimony of Hose Johnson is the statement of the appellant in the regard above mentioned, in which he said that Tom Reed, deceased, was trying to kill him, and that he beat him to it.

There appears nothing in the record to show previous threats or difficulties of any consequence between the parties. The killing, as reflected from, the facts before us, is apparently without explanation. We have always held that if the killing is without explanation, and there be no facts in the record, which would lead us to conclude from a careful consideration of them that upon a trial had before a fair jury upon such evidence a capital conviction would result, the case would be one for bail. The state not having undertaken to show anything that would indicate that condition of mind which under our former decisions would have been considered express malice, and having rested its case upon testimony failing to show that the killing was not upon sudden impulse, we feel impelled to apply to the decision of the question raised the doctrines applicable to an unexplained killing above mentioned. It appears to us that appellant’s application for bail should have been granted. We are not unmindful of the statements relative to appellant’s inability to give any considerable bond. If the courts were to fix a bond in every case commensurate with the ability of the accused to make it and in no way affected by the seriousness of the crime charged, it would result in nominal bonds in many cases where the offense committed is of the gravest character. Taking into consideration the gravity of the offense charged and the seriousness of the evidence in the record affecting guilt, but believing the case to be one in which bail should be granted, the judgment of the trial court is reversed and bail fixed in the sum of $5,000. 
      É=For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes