The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1873-09-18
Synopsis OF Opinions Delivered by the
Supreme Court OF Texas.

supreme Court OF Texas.
AUSTIN, Sept. ?, 1873.
No. 13s0.-sandy Cruise v. The State
Jefferson. An Indictment, which describes
the wound which produced the death OF
deceased as tone mortal wound, > without
further description, is sufficient under the
law of Texas.
Judgment affirmed.
No. f52O.-L. r. Bassham V. The State
Ellis. Nothing having been proved which
entitled the defendant to offer his declara-
tions at the time of the homicide, in evil
dence to the jury, as part of the res gesta,
It was not error for the court TO charge that
these declarations were not of any weight.
Where party, in cross examination,
seeks to draw out new matter not inquired
Of in the examination in chief he makes
the witness his own, and the opposite party
may insist on eross-examination thereon.
The defendant had right to have the
jury polled; but this being done, he had
no right to inquire further Of them if they
had separated or been intoxicated during
the trial.
Judgment affirmed
No. 1575.-Wm. Norris v. The State-
Washington. Escaping from Jail after APP
peal is a voluntary withdrawal from the ju-
risdiction of the court, and is good ground
for Diminishing the appeal.
Under Arts. 2203 and 2204 Pasehal's Di-
gest, it was error 70 refuse TO give this
charge asked by defendants counsel, IF
the jury believe from the testimony, that
the wound was not mortal one, but was
made so by malpractice in dressing the
same, they cannot find the defendant guilty
of murder"
Reversed and remanded.
No. 163T.-James II. Brown V. The State
Fort Bend. When defendant prosecuted
for felony is taken suddenly i'll, aud the
court is satisfied that he is too i'll to be
present in open court at every stage of the
proceedings, the causes should be Temporal
rily continued, OF "a juror withdrawn, and
the case continued FOR the term. The pris-
oner should not only be within the walls of
the court house, but should be present
when the trial is going on, that he may see
and be seen, hear and be heard.
In aprosecution for felony, the counsel
for the accused may do and consent To GER
tain things Tor their client, but the separa-
ton Of the jury is not one Of those things.
In this case, the jury separated for the
night, six jurors in one room IN charge OF
deputy, FIVE in another room with two bA-
lifts, and one at his home with an officer.
Held, this is not such n separation as is
contemplated by the law; but every juror
should be under the protection and control
Of an officer, that no communication may
be had with another person in any wise
touching the case.
L was error TO instruct the jury that the
four causes enumerated in Art ss54 Pas
chal's Digest, are the only causes which
would reduce the homicide from murder to
manslaughter. The expression adequate
cause may include Others.
No. 1651.-James A. 6iatlin v The State
--Bexar. Where there Isl general ownership
in one person, and special in another, in
the property stolen, the indictment may lay
the property in either
Judgment affirmed.
No. 16S6.-Walter Potter v. The State
Cameron. An indictment Tor theft from
house, which describes the property stolen
as ssone certain trunk or chest, containing, "
etc, Is bad for uncertainty.
Reversed and rcmanded
No. f706.-W +. Holland y. The State
EFath. An appellate court, in determining
the merits Of an appeal on the ground of the
refusal OF q continuance, may compare the
affidavit with the proven history of the
case, to ascertain the materiaiity 81 the tes-
timony. the want Of which IS tie grouud OF
the motion.
Where the indictment charges murder in
The first degree, and the defense is eliti. the
following charge sufficiently defines murler
and malice, and no other instruction on
those points was require3 III the Jury be-
liove from the evidence that the defendant
and J. +, acting together coolly, deliber
ately. with a sedatc mind and formed design
to Kin H.. followed him and shot him With
a pistol, from which pistol shot II. died,
then you viii find he'dcfendsnt guilty and
assess, etc.
And the verdict, which finds the defend
ant guilty, and assesses ACCOMPLISHMENT pre-
scFibed for that degree, Is not ambiguous,
but Is sufficient 70 support Tue Judgment.
Judgment affirmed.
No. fi1S.-Albert F0lcha y. The State
Bastrop. An order overriding motion for
4 new lrial IS not & Judgment ol cOnvic-
ton rendered. within the meaning 0f article
Hoppe y. Tie State. NNNIt Texas Reports.
$50. IS receded iron. and the court returns
q the rullRgs IN chultz y. The State. XII
Texas Reports, t0l. and other cases down
g Lane Y. Elllngcs, AokNlI Texas Reports.
$50, inclusive.
Appeal dismissed.
40. 1sS0.-Fornando francisco s. Tbs
-Ell;s a charge. that the canses-
sions az s party accused cannot bo used
arainsl him. Z unattended BY other eircom.
stances g i improperly made is held - he
eouect.
No 1853. Ned Davidson >. The State
San lac;nto. The admission 81 the Cfl.
1snco 81 witness of tender years IS :
matter loT tho sound discretion Sc tho
court
10. l6ll.-Ihe state y. jesse Better
Saith. ~ order for change g venue lin
criminal cse S inopcI11Ft. unless the