The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1881-11-24

synopsis OF tho Decisions Of the Court o
Appsiia.


that the witness was in the court room
during the progress of the trial, II appears
that he heard some Of the evidence. Such
being the case, there was no improperly in
permitting him 10 testify, but his presence
being in violation of law, both he, and the
officer having him in charge, should have
been subjected to punishment as for con-
tempt of court, The enforcement ofthe
rule" and the latitude allowable to coun-
sci in argument are. matters within the
sound discretion of the court. and. this
court will interfere only when abuse is APP
pnrent-and it is not apparent in this case
Having agreed to and signed statement
of facts which was approved, defendant
cannot be heard to complain OF its lnaccura-
cies. But the venue not having Decn
proved the judgment is reversed. White,
presiding justice.
Duffin VS.. the State, from Robertson
county. The rule, article 735, which with
the exception therein mentioned, renders
the husband or VIE incompetent to tes-
tifv against each other in criminal prosecu-
tions, is held to render them also incom-
petent against joint offender with either;
If q prosecution had been commenced
against the husband and afterwards mol
pros entered, the wife would be compe.
tent witness against the joint o11endep-
whenever co-defendant is competene
witness his wife would be. But, however
incompetent evidence may be, unless OBJ
iected to when offered, objection after YER
dict will not avail. The defendant has the
right to show the animus and bias of a wit
ness if he can, and it's extent, and for re-
fusing this privilege, the judgment is
reversed. White, presiding justice.
J. P. and D. w. Boyd VS.. the State; from
Delta county. An information is not ex-
ceptionable because based upon an affidavlt
which had served the same purpose in
respect of previous information which had
been mol pressed. The insuf1iciency OF an
information would not necessarily ,yitiate
the affidavit on which it is based; but a
new trial should have been granted in this
case, because the evidence is insufficient to
sustain conviction. Reversed and re-
manded. Winkler, j.
w. H. Kennedy VS.. the State; from Delta
county, An Indictment transferred from
the District Court to the County Court bore
an incorrect file mark, and the Court did
not err in permitting the State to introduce
certified transcript Of the proceedings OF the
District Court to shsw when it was filed.
Nor was it error to permit the State to ask
witness if the offense was committed be-
fore the presentation of the indictment, a
conviction for simple assault may, be had
under an information for aggravated as
sault. Affirmed. Winkler,j.
Durley VS.. the State; from Camp
county. Though the recognizance itsell
does not show the date it was cntcredsinto
the transcript shows the days OF
the beginning and ending OF
the term Of court, and recites that
the proceedings in the case were had in
open court during that time, and that the
int
court Held, that being otherwise unob'
iectionable. the recognizance is sufficient
Per curiam.
Grant e. Easton VS.. Anderson; from
Robertson county. Minors, on reach
ing majority, are qualified, to sue
in their own names on note made to their
guardian though he was not dis.
charged and interpoosed no objection. And
though tour years have elapsed since the
execution of the note, it is not barred il
that time has not elapsed since the male
minor reached majority, and the female mi.
nor married. Affirmed. Hurt, j.
E. G.. Waugh ct ais. VS.. the State; from Lam
passes county. The certificate of the clerk
| of the court below to the effect that the APP
plication for continuance was lost and could
not be incorporated in the record, will not
supply the record SO that this court
can consider the assignment of error:
The one partner having exclusive control
and management of the property stolen, 1t
was unnecessary to charge or prove the want
of the consent of the other partner to the
taking. Affirmed. White, presiding jus
tice,
Pullen VS.. the State; from McMullen
county, Application that fails to show
when the subpoena was issued and returned
mot found" when the attachment for the
witness was issued, or that it was delivered
TO or sent in due course of mail, POSTPAID"
ETC., to the sheriff of the other county is
fatally defective. An indictment for the
illegal branding ola colt need not aver the
generic of the species-whether equine or
bovine--"colt"pertains to both. affirmed.
Hunt, justice.
Garcia vs. the State; from McMullen
county. Where the indictments sufficient,
as in this case, to apprise the defendant OF
the identity of the animal he is charged
with stealing, and the application
for new trial is based on the
discovery of new evidence directed to that
point, the new trial is properly refused.
The charge in this case was full and COM
plete upon all the questions raised. AZ
firmed. Per curlam.
Doc. Cooper VS.. the State. from Camp
county Article $50 ofthe Code Of Criminal
Procedure imperatively requires that the
recognizance shall specify distinctly the
time or the term Of the court at which the
defendant binds himself to appear and
answer the complaint against him, and,
though complete in other respects, If the
recognizance is defective in this motion
TO dismiss must prevail. Appeal dismissed.
Snow VS.. the State; from kaufman coun-
ty. An indictment for misdemeanor being
transferred to the County. Court, 1t was
thence sent back because Of the disquallii-
cation of the County Judge under Z. z, r,
A k.nn tefs s1f Ind
wise disqualified, the case remained upon
the docket, as IL appears by the record, I'M
Ill one ID. signing himself Special District
| Judge, rereicrred IL TO the County Court,
another and qualified judge having been
elected IN the meantime. The record tails
10 show by what authority ID. acted as Spe.
cial Judge. Held, that the District Court
had original jurisdiction after the transfer
from the County Court; that the record
must set out the fact and proceedings OF the
election or appointment of Special Judge
Articles 1S0 75l, c. q. p, prescribe The
means Of selecting Special Judges, and the
record must show their appointment in &C
cordance herewith. Reversed AMI re-
handed. White. presiding justice.
Lee George vs. the State; from Della
county. The word adult" as used In
Art. 490 Of the Penal Code signifies :
person who has attained the ful age o.
! twenty-one years. Tie prosecution Of Z
male person under tweuty-one years OF age
I for aggravated assault under Art ~
I Penal COds, may be maintained under sub
division 9 Of but not under subdivision 3
/ Violent and indecent familiarity with th,
per.on Of female against her c0nfent with
intent 70 have improper intercourse viii
her. IL an aggravated assault Evidence i
admissible af any stage Of the proceeding
before the conclusion Of argument, WheI
necessary for the due adniuisirnllcn o
Justice Reversed and remanded. White
presiding justice.
William Vim ". the State; ron Hop
kins county. When the record fails 20 dis
ci0se that the sprellaut in q misdefneano
case, entered into q rrc0gnlzance 20 aDld.
TIE result of his appeal. j must appear nf
firmntively that be l. in custody pe1dinl
his appeal else this court requires no iuris