Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-07-06

VouEb ItrpuHutu iuiiy hnu COTFeCtiy 10
every issue raised by the evidence,
which In every respect was sufficient
TO establish the taking OF the animal
by the defendant, and the criminal In.
tent with which he took him. The
Judgment is affirmed.
Brooks We. Duty n Holmes, from
Falls county. n Notwithstanding he
has assumed the expense, and gone to
the trouble OF perfecting his appeal
from the Judgment rendered
against him In the court below, the
appellant has failed TO appear either.by
counsel or brief, TO present his
appeal to the final hearing
In this court. The appeal Is therefore
dismissed for want OF prosecution, and
the costs In this behalf expended are
taxed against appellant and the sure
he certified below for observance.
Ordered accorded.
Naught vs.. Potter, from Cooke
county. The appellee in this case
submits his motion to strike out the
statement OF facts and the bill OF ex-
captions brought up in the record.
Inasmuoh as Il appears that both the
statement OF facts aud the bills OF eN.
ception were filed in the court below
more than ten days after adjourn
ment, the motion prevails. The case
then being submitted on briefs for
both parties, and upon suggestion of
delay by the appellee, IL Ia taken upon
final hearing, and record showing
that the sole purpose of the appeal IL
TO secure delay, the. suggestion il up.
held and the judgment is affirmed.
Green w. Sass, Merritt n Merritt,
from Bastrop county, The appellant
in this case files his motion TO with
draw the transcript which he filed in
this court upon perfecting his ~ peal,
Such motions are ordinarily granted,
subject to the payment of such costs M
have accrued, AZ " matter OF right, the
appt liant or plaintiff In error being
entitled to his transcript 80 long ~ he
Is not in arrears To the officers of the
court. Upon his payment of the costs
that have accrued in this behalf, the
appellant has authority to withdraw
HE transcript. Ordered accordingly.
Williams VS.. the State, from Gray
son county. The appellant in this
case was convicted OF murder in the
first degree and his punishment was
assessed at confinement In the peni-
Tertiary for the term of his natural
life. The case cannot be considered
by this court upon its merits for the
reason that the court below failed to
pass the sentence upon HIM In accord
ance with the verdict of the Jury, az
is required by law. For the reason
stated the assistant Encouragement q
motion to dismiss the appeal Ia sus-
tained. Appeal dismissed.
Porter vs. Byrne, from Hays ooun-
ty. The judgment rendered below
was at a previous day of this term az
tirmed by this court without n written
opinion. The appellant dissatisfied
with such disposition of the case has
filed his motion for rehearing. The
motion, however, fails to present any
legitimate question which could be
considered In the case, which was not
passed upon on the original hearing,
nor does IL point out wherein this
court erred in the decision rendered
The court adheres to its previous dispo.
sition OF the case, satisfied OF the cor
rectness. Motion overruled,
Cohen vs.. state, from Dallas county.
The statute controlling the subject
prescTibes imperatively that, as II con.
dition precedent To appeal to this
court, the accused, upln conviction,
aud upon his motion tor new trial be.
ing overruled below, shall give notice
In open court OF his appeal TO this
court, which notice shall be entered
upon the minutes of the trial court. II
IL also required that the transcript To
this court shall show nflirmatively
that such notice was given and that II
WAS entered upon the minutes. This
transcript having failed in this partic-
ular, the states motion To dismiss the
apneal must prevail. The appeal is
dismissed.
Mahona vs.. the State, from Travis
county. The appellant IN this case
was convicted OF the oifense OF burgla
nv, and was awarded term OF two
years in the penitentiary as his pun.
ishment. The state filed "a motion o.
dismiss the appeal upon the ground
that the appeal bond misdescribed the
Judgment. The ground, however, /,
not sustained by the record, aud thu
motion is overrulei. The appeal
however, is without merit. The in
dictment charges every element of the
ofiense, and to the evidence, which Il
ample TO support the verdict of the
Jury, the court pertinently applied tn,
Jaw OF the case, Affirmed.
Bacon, alias Perkins, from Travi,
county. The conviction In this cast
was for an assault with intent TO com
nit rape The grounds relied on los
the appellant for reversal Of the judg
ment are that the indictment did not
properly charge the oliense, that the
charge OF the curt was erroneous in
various particulars and that the evil
dence was insufficient. Neither ground
IL we'll assigned, The indictment
properly charged the assault and spe
officially that IL was made with intent
to rape. The evidence was conclusive
as to the assault and equally so that II
was made with intent TO rape, aud the
charge responded to every issue in the
case, Affirmed,
Smith va. the State, from Howard
county. The appellant in this case
was convicted OF mauslaughter under
an indictment that charged him with
murder. IL 10 shown, in support OF
the states motion 10 dismiss the ap
peal, by the ailidavits of the proper
officers that pending his appeal, tbs
defendant effected hts escape from til,
custody OF the officers, and that his re
turn to that custody was the result o
IA a Iii 90 81