Case ID: sw_285/html/0321-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BEEET, J. LATTIMORE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ROBERTSON v. STATE.
    (No. 10080.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    April 28, 1926.
    Rehearing Denied June 23, 1926.)
    1. Homicide &wkey;>340(l) — Error' in instruction on manslaughter need not he reviewed, where defendant’s testimony shows guilt beyond dispute, and he was given minimum punishment.
    Where defendant’s own testimony shows guilt of manslaughter beyond dispute, and he was given minimum punishment 'for such offense,' appellate court need not review alleged errors in submitting such issue, as incorrect charge thereon could not injure defendant.
    On Motion for Eehearing.
    2. Criminal law <&wkey;982.
    Conviction for manslaughter canno.t be reversed because of jury’s failure to give suspended sentence.
    3. Criminal law <&wkey;!038(3), 1056(1) — Failure to charge on self-defense is not reversible error, in absence of request therefor, or exception to charge on such ground.
    Failure to charge on self-defense in murder trial is not reversible error, where no special charge thereon is requested, nor any exception taken to charge on such ground.
    Commissioners’ Decision.
    Appeal from District Court, Palo Pinto County; J. B. Keith, Judge.
    D. O. Kobertson was convicted of manslaughter, and- he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Oxford & Johnson, of Stephenville, for appellant.
    Sam D. Stinson, State’s' Atty., of Austin, and Eobt. M. Lyles, Asst State’s Atty., of Groesbeek, for the State.
   BEEET, J.

The offense is manslaughter, and the punishment is 2 years in the penitentiary. The killing grew out of an assault which is alleged to have been made by the deceased on the young daughter of the appellant. The court submitted the case on the issues of murder and manslaughter; no charge on self-defense or other justification was given or ashed, and the failure to so submit any such issue was not excepted to by appellant, and no complaint is made with reference thereto.

There are no bills of exceptions in the record and no special charges offered and refused. There are various exceptions to the court’s charge. The appellant’s own testimony, however, shows beyond dispute that he was .guilty of manslaughter, and, in view of the fact that he was given the minimum punishment for this offense, we are not called upon to review the alleged errors in the court’s charge in submitting, this issue to the jury, 'as an incorrect charge on this subject could not have possibly injured him in this case. Munos v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 147, 124 S. W. 941.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment is in all things affirmed.

PER CURIAM. The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judge of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

LATTIMORE, J.

We cannot reverse a judgment for manslaughter because the jury did not give to the accused a suspended sentence; nor can we hold the failure to charge on self-defense reversible error, where no special charge is requested presenting the issue of.self-defense and no exception was taken to the charge for its failure to submit the law of such issue. These are the only two questions raised in the motion for rehearing. Same will be overruled. 
      <&wkey;For other eases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes