The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1885-07-05
THE HIGHER COURTS.
COURT OF APPEALS.


contained is based upon the fact that
the same were filed in the court below
more than ten days after the adjourn
ment of court, which being sustained
in fact, the motion will prevail, and as
there is no merit in the appeal the sug
gestion of delay will prevail and the
Judgment affirmed with damages. At
firmed.
Green VS.. Sass ct al, from Bastrop
County. Transcripts in this court may
be withdrawn upon dismissal of the
appeal upon the clerks costs being sat-
isfied. In this case appellants motion
to withdraw the transcripts will pre-
vail, and upon payment OF all costs
due In this court he will be allowed
possession Of the transcripts.
Williams vs.. the State, from Gray
son County. In convictions for muir
der OF the first degree, whore the pen
atty is assessed at confinement in the
penitentiary, there can be no final
Judgment which will give this court
jurisdiction Of the appeal without sem
tence having been duly passed upon
| defendant in the court below, Appeal
dismissed.
Porter VS.. Byrne; from Hays County.
| at a former day OF this term this cause
was affirmed without written opinion.
The appellant files his motion for
| new hearing, but upon another care
| full consideration we TAIL to discover
any error in our former holding nor
| anything therein requiring q written
opinion. Rehearing denied.
CohenVs. the State, from Dallas
County. 1t 10 imperatiYely required
that, as condition precedent to iuris-
dlctlon in this court, it must aflirma-
lively appear from the transcript on
appeal that after conviction and mo.
| ton for new trial III tho court below,
notice ofappesl was given and entered
on. record. Without such affirmative
showing this court has no jurisdiction.
Appeal dismissed.
| Mahona VS.. the State; from Travis
County. Conviction for burglary, TOR
which two years IN the penitentiary
was assessed. Tho motion to dismiss
the appeal is Overruled. The appeal,
however, is without merit. The in
dictment correctly charges every ele-
| ment OF the oitense charged, the cyl
dence amply supports the verdict and
the charge Of the court correctly ap.
pealed the law to the evidence. Az
| tirmed.
Bacon alias Perkins, from Travis
County. Conviction for assault with
intent to rape. The appeal is without
merit. None of tho grounds urged for
q reversal are tenable. The indict-
ment and charge of the court are good
and sufficient. The evidence is amply
sufficient TO support the verdict and
the judgment Is affirmed.
Potts VS.. ThompEins, administrator,
from Jones county, There is no as
signment OF errors in the record; no
evidence Of any brief having been filed
by appellant in the court below and
the transcript on appeal is not official
ly endorsed by tho clerk Of tho trial
as is required by tho rules, wherefore
the appeal is dismissed.
Anderson OF al w. Campbell, from
Tyler County. Appellant having failed
to file transcript of tho record, ap.
pelleo files certified copy of the
judgment aud appeal bond and cor-
titiCate OF the clerk as TO when the
appeal was perfected. Upon these he
bases his motion to affirm the judg.
mont without reference to tho merits
OF the case, which motion prevails.
Affirmed.
Smith vs. State, from Howard Coun-
ty. Conviction for manslaughter un-
der an indictment charging murder. A |
motion to dismiss tho appeal &C. !
companied by tho necessary aflidayits !
required by statute, upon tho ground |
OF tho escape of the appellant from the !
officer pending the appeal and his re- !
turn to custody was not voluntary. |
This action of defendant withdraws
the jurisdiction OF this court. Appeal
dismissed.
@lrby VS.. the State, from Cherokee |
County. Where the confession of de-
PENDANT is freely made after he has
been fully warned of the conse-
quences Of his confossing his guilt it
relieves a case, otherwise 20 bur
dened, Of the necessity OF a charge
upon cirCumstantial evidence, aud
though the other evidence against him
may DO purely circumstantial no
charge thereon Is required. Affirmed. !
Short va. tho State, from Grayson
County. There being no bill Of eXcep-
tons in the record and the charge of
the court being good and sufficient, |
and the indictment in all respects up
to the requirements Of the statute, and
there being evidence TO support tho
verdict found by the Jury, the iudg-
ment must be and Is affirmed.
Williams vs.. the State, from Color
ado County. Conviction for awind-
ling. The indictment sufficiently al
loges all tho essential clements Of the
oilense charged, The charge correct
" presented the abstract principles of
law and In the absence of a statement
of facts the judgment must be az
flrmed.
Bridges Va. tho State, FROM Wise
County. When there Is no statement
nt fuRfU "A
ment correctly charges all tho elo-
monts of tho otlense necessary 20 be
alleged, and there is no error in tho
charge OF the court as to abstract prin- !
clples of the lrw, the judgment win be !
affirmed.
Railroad Company VS.. Ochiltree.
from Parker County. This appeal |
bringing before this court questions |
arising purely from tho facts adduced |
upon the trial and there being evidence |
TO support tho verdict OF tho jury pass
ing on the issues OF fact the Judgment !
Is affirmed.
Ben Potter vs.. the state, from Hays |
County. Where no bill OF exceptions
IL taken nor contained in tho record !
this court Will not regard questions
relating to tho charge of tho court un- !
less fundamental error appears therein
calculated TO iniure appellants
rights. When tho motion Tor new
trial, based on nowly discovered evil
dence, is not sworn to it is insufficient. !
Affirmed.
Sam Jones VS.. the State; from Fort
Bend County. Conviction for murder
in tho second degree, for which 10 |
years in tho ponitentiary was awarded. |
The alleged obnoxious portions of the
charge Of the court not being excepted
to, and there being no fundamental
error prejudioial to defendants rights
apparent OF record, the judgment is
affirmed.
Wolf va. tho State; from Ellis
County. The indictment properly
alleging all tho necessary elements Of
the otlense charged, tho charge of the |
court not being sub ioct to AFFECTION, and |
the evidence amply sustaining The |
verdict rendered, the judgment Is af- |
firmod.
Brooks vs.. tho State, from Ellis
County. The motion OF tho assistant |
attorney general 10 dismiss this ap- |
pedl must prevail upon two grounds; |
FIRST, becauseofthe deathlofth defend. |
ant, and, second, because he was con-