The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1882-11-30
ootnf 0r ArpnAts
synopsis ~ Oplnlona ~ the Court Of Ap'
peals, Tyler Term. 1883,

UOuHf ~ ArPEAts.
,ynopala ~ Oplaions ~ ihe Court of Ap.
peals, Tyler Term. 1854
Wheeler Va. Town, from Van Iandt
B,unty. The defendant In error In this
case moves the court to affirm the writ OF
error on certificate, and shows that on Feb.
ruary 10, 1881 plalntilfin error flied In the
court below his petition and bond Tor writ
of error and suporsedo as In the cause that
said plaintiff has failed to iie transcript
Of the proceedings of the lower court, as IL
required by law, aud herewith defendant
files his crtihcale for aillrmance. Held the
record bearing the allegation Of defendant in
error out and such giving him the right for
alIirmmcc, the judgment is affirmed. Will
son, j.. ,... g.. ,,...,.
county. At former day OF this court TINS
appeal was dismissed. The appellees now
come and under oath asks that mandate is,
sue ut once, inasmuch as they are informed
and believe that appellant is encumbering
his property in order to defeat his creditors
and disposing of his crop, and II they are
compelled await the workings OF the law
they will lose their claim. The appeal was
dismissed October 2lst. No motion to re-
instate has been made. Held, upon sucn
state of facts the court will order the lssu-
ance of the mandate forthwith upon pay
ment of costs. Mandate ordered TO issue
on payment of costs. Wilson, j.
LaGroye VS.. McLendon from Harrison
county. This appeal is sought to be dis,
missed because the transcript herein iled
was not filed on or before the first day OF
the day set for the assignment to which the
county from which the appeal is taken be-
longs Held, the record bears appellee out
in his statements, and no good cause IS
shown why appellant ialled 10 lie thls
transcript as is required by law. therefore,
n remains only for us to dismiss the APP
peal. w. 1.a4
Parker VS.. the State; from Van Zandt
county. An indictment, alleging that de-
PENDANT "did unlawfully keep and exhibit
certain bank and table for the purpose OF
gaming" is good q ct. App. 1SO., There
is line of decisions in this state, holdlng
under the former law that it was not an OF,
fence to keep or exhibit, for the purpose OF
gaming, table licensed by law and on
which 1be license has been paid. 1t is now
a violation of the law to Keep or exhibit a
table for the purpose of gaming, notWlth-
standing such table may be licensed under
the law, and it is an offence to wager or Del
upon such table. Affirmed. Wilson, J,
Weaver VS.. State; from Hopkins county:
Appellant objected to the Introduction OF
the indictment and bond, because the oond
signed by him as surety and W. Il. Iorlet
as principal is not forfeited by an lndict-
ment against W. L. Iorpet ~ anu al Thrt
the Judgment vici is against W. L. Torbert:
Held, there being no allegation IN the SCI
ia proceedings that they were the same per-
son. it was error for the court to allow the
introduction of the Indictment and BOND.
Reversed and remanded, Hurt, j..
Harden VS.. the State; from Hopkins
county. The court in its charge assumed
that appellant did not act in good faltn,
and that he accused Simpson 1a'seiy III
order to clear himself, when the evidence
clearly showed the contrary, that deien-
dant had acted in good faith in regard 10
the contract. Held, it is error for the court
to assume the existence Of fact or state OF
facts in their character criminative and TO
charge thereon. Is Ct. App. o9O). reversed
and remanded. Hurt, j.
Hall VS., the State; from Hunt county.
This is q conviction for burglariZlng mouse
in the day time. Appellant was in saloon
on the day of the burglary, and when the
sheriff entered, who did not suspect him,
he n'' ran. saving: pm the man you are
looking for.h When arrested portion OF
the stolen goods were found on his person.
This made the evidence very conclusive as
to his guilt. The house being broken into
after daylight, the charge of burglary IN
day time was sustained. The indictment,
the charge of the court and the conviction
are unobnoxious Affirmed. White, p. j..
Watson rs. the State, from Nacogdoches
county. Appellant was charged, with ana
convicted Of playing cards in house used
for retailing liquors. The proof showed
that he played cards in an upper room OF a
building, the basement room OF which was
used for retailing liquors The upper room
was in no way connected with the basement
eycept by pair of steps leading into the
street from the upper room. Held, this did
not bring the upper room within the prohi-
hilton of the statute. Had the upper room
bt en- connected in any way with the room
below, or been used so as to give IL the
character of house for retailing liquors,
it would have made appellant amenable to
the statute. C2G Tex, GS2) Reversed ana
remanded. Hurt, J.
Heacock VS.. the State from Van Iandt
county. The mere fact that person. has
paid or promised TO pay money TO ana IN
the prosecution OF a person charged WIN
crime, is not sufficient to constitute such
person private prosecutor under the stet-
ute, The fact that the person has 1een In
the BANGING business for five years, more or
less experienced in handwriting ana THINKS
be could tell by comparing two written IN
struments whether the same person wrote
them, does not constitute him an expert,
and he should not be permitted to testify
as such; art. 754, Code Grim. Proc; en-.
app, 1876; Wharf. Grim. Ev. $4,000 he-
versed and remanded. Wilson, I.
A.