The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1883-06-14
THE STATE COURTS.

al, Efnfn ".
calvert Us. 'hg o.a'e' NY Tonv;ction for
U ,;PDtnrhir w conereeation assembled
dlsturoing stS oboroed to
Tor Tengl9us mo ..onrsG;ro and Swearing
nave peeh a uu ni Wy Iy,c;terons manner.n The
IN louu anu h;oo,ions MAS allowed to ask
state, oael V t;ne witnsss. Twas the manner
the prosecuting mi WI. r,o Whom ba called
in which deiendaht spJHe w. ,o d;strrh the
you dDn on liaT G answered. "It was
congregatlon' ,,oui.teJ 70 d,stnrb the as.
IN manner oa,ou; ), Usid. The oh
sempleu cUhsIesa.; and answer shonld
lections 10 Tue q ues;;,a for under the
have been sus'a .he ar;denca NAV have
facts IN this cise .he u; ;nsnenc;ng the
had material welenST h AZ onmr. also erred
finding OF the jury, Inc ooua' , a,SO 20
In refusing 10 aiioM ' nyh~ NO. ~ that de.
answer the q9ese,on' i;arS what had
fendant caileu y YOU pnwa-sod and re-
you zone Ut saiu
Peterson vs.. the state IrGln ion oonv e1n
county. opliIio u,;,h infant n rane The
tlon ior assault VIII ast we,ton unprovoked
evla s suoms assanit nv anpellapt with
ana outrageous ass n,nt;ve Vet il fails 10
out any apparent ih onS not;ve was rape,
show show the ln i;e u;tness saws while he
The prosecutlns "tness soy he
shaken anu s.ruoA 70 nei' throw
did not ,;I trr 70 mil, mn NV
me doWn' r rHI e u,I beinv too upcer-
clotnlng; ine ~ warrant ma in
taln anu ,S;a oonviciion for an assault
permitting .his oo ~ stand as a nrecedent.
with intent 70 5ape W ssanu "'
'e M,hs a'i ~ state. from Falls county,
Wolf VS., the otatei iroih frs a IN
opinion py Wnue,p; J.aa;ant Of theft.
tent is the essen'lai tha time of The
TINS lntehI mus ronst he an sc,uaI
taxing ,on dne t frsna upon the rights Of
a another nns'" the taking mast include the
purpose and lnteHt ~ 20 ;nv
must be an inte me ou.ro, n, ;ntan,
without the consen. Nv n,an,ionsI annronria-
tlonal iraud anu hn iI1eno" ; this aasa
ton. Where ine eyluene 800 a. re '1 noon in
shows that ue' tInis s TO- What he con.
question: 10 Pay hi l.I''s, ,r;tross owed him
sidered tne prosecuting IN he absence y
without MS cohsent anu - prasseJ ara 70.
there is no THEFT suoWn' he'ei'eu "nu
manded: u,.,,o-,h va Tho stata
Robertson ana Mni'r n,.i, Vs. he r WjIson
from Bosque county. OplI s"i. Iii honj
]. proceeding upon "a, ioa'e .,civii,S action
Is crlinlIai at,iaa ~ new trial ana
the state is not entitled 70 new ,risi' anu
in such case, Wnere s d.fs,dsnt
dere1 IN favor vi tIe Iein.s
1t is conclusive, snu eni,o.a
the suit finally. III lne oIgIna, ~ oa',,,,
or judgment insi was oeieStte' .he NV a,sy,
attorney should nave mao 'ne sale
amended, before prOceeulnB W tisi uPon
il. After trial and verdict anu Juusnens
Tor defendants, iurtheI pfOceeuIss 49,
coram non JUDGE and VOID. REVERSED anu
dismissed. c.,.,
Perry 81 al vs.. tne Sthte, run s,t'u.
county. Opinion by Wilson, e ~ l
ord shows TINS case was uleu Veioie, CIV
the Judgment apPeaien hOni
n ndered BY hon. l. q Mhles' ~
porting 70 De Juoss " -
District court OF the Judicial dlslrlct inelun
ing Coleman county, lhis eguI. yuuIOiS ~
knows that hon. W. DihcAyutn
Judge OF SAID districi ~ the ZINE " VIC " -
Of this cause, and further that mere Va NJ
Judge Of the district court IN TINS state ~
the time Of said trial, whose name ~
White. Held in the absence OF me sn9"lns
In the record that the cause was uleu sno
SAD Judgment renoerea by hJuuee na "a, -
that cauacItV. We m uHt treat tue luuEmtuA