Case ID: sw_208/html/0516-01.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

LEWIS v. STATE.
    (No. 5256.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Jan. 29, 1919.)
    1. Cbiminal Law <&wkey;889 — Correction of Verdict by Jury.
    In prosecution for unlawfully carrying a pistol, court did not err in permitting jury in open court, when returning the verdict, to correct it by inserting words “as charged in the indictment.”
    2. Weapons <&wkey;7 — Pistol Law — Lack of Intent to Violate.
    Lack of evil intent, or intent to violate the law, in carrying a pistol unlawfully, is no justification.
    Appeal from Matagorda County Court; W. C. Carpenter, Judge.
    George Lewis was convicted of unlawfully carrying a pistol, and appeals.
    Affirmed.
    E. B. Hendricks and E. A. Berry, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.
   LATTIMORE, J.

Appellant was convicted in the county court of Matagorda county for unlawfully carrying a pistol. His only defense seems to have been that he was at the time a deputy city marshal in the town of Bay City, and he claims that his carrying said pistol outside of the city limits of Bay City was not a violation of the law. It seems that, in connection with his other business, he was the proprietor of a jitney car, and while acting in that capacity carried passengers some distance outside of the city limits of Bay City, and on the occasion in question, while at the place outside .of said city, to which he had carried the passengers, there arose a quarrel, in the course of which appellant drew his pistol. There is no statement of facts in the record, but we gather, from the charge of the court and the two bills of exception taken by appellant, that the above are substantially the facts in the case.

Appellant complains here 'because the court permitted the. jury, in open court, and when returning their verdict, to make a correction of the same. Said correction consisted in inserting the words “as charged in the indictment” in said verdict. We do not think there is any error in permitting juries to correct their verdicts, and certainly none in making such correction as was made in this case.

Appellant further complains because the court did not submit a special instruction to the jury that, if they believed that he carried his pistol without intent to violate the law, they should acquit. The lack of evil intent in the carrying of a pistol unlawfully is no justification. Johnson v. State, 73 Tex. Cr. R. 133, 164 S. W. 833.

There are no other errors complained of in the record, and, there being no statement of facts, the judgment is affirmed. 
      <§=5>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes