Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-06-16
THE HIGHER COURTS.
Synopsss OF Decisions Rendered at tho
Present Austin Sitting Of The
Higher Courts Of Texas.
Court CT Appeals and Commission of APP
peals Electromagnetic ,sions In a Large
N0mher Oasea.
The DGpvt of Appeals.
cadence of Inc Gazette.

convicted, aih given nine years IN the
penitentisry Ly the verdict. There was
motion for hes trial, and the charge Of
the court to the jlry was questioned on
several pJiD 9, hil the court holds there
was TO error il Tie conviction. Affirmed
Dahs W.. the Stale; E. Paso. In this
Gaze, which wss 8 conviction for an sg
gravAted assault U pom one Lucinda Nc
Neil, woman, the appellant being 9
mar, 3 fine Of $50 WAS assessed against
him Dy verdict of the jury. The Assis-
tsut Attorney General moves to dismiss
the appeal because the record does Eot
sho7 thst any notice OF appeal waa given
Granted. Dismissed.
Lee Shelby vs.. The State, Robertson
county. This IS conviction Tor an az
grSvated assault and oatlery upon tae
person Of one Marian CanGish Tee in
formation charged as one phase c. the
assault that the appellant Was al ad alt
msle aad tins assaulted l.rty fsmil ;
another tnGt the defendant being an adult
male person and the assaulted person a
female did strike, wound and bTuise her
WIKI hCrseyGip The defendant moved
the court 10 cump2l the county attorney
to eject on Wh.cl count he asked con-
victiOn. The motion was ovarruled. Held
by the court: The statement OF facts in
the record Is not approved and was not
fled n Ilsne; in tce aoserce VI state
ment Of facts there is no error N the
conviction. Approved.
Lynch vs. The S:1tt; G7Iiad. Theft of
mule; fiva years in the penitenuary. II
YVES shown on the trial that appel
ant hsd gwen TWO contradictory accounts
OF his possession Of tae mules, and that
he had MADE two 4 gats; the defendant
was not represented by counsel below,
and appesled his CAGE himselt. Held by
the court: That the evidence is sufficient,
charge correcs and no error apparent.
Affirmed.
Raizvs State, Kinney county. Apl sl-
liant was charged with snd convicted fJr
theft Of horse, and given ten years in
the psnitentiaTy. There are several bills OF
exception in the record, one OF which
raises the objection that the court charged
the presumption Of innocence and req.
sonable doubt, IN the earlier instead OF
the latter portion Of the charge. There
was 8 motion for new trial, which
among other grounds set up the fact that
two witnesses who would have sworn
that the defendant purchased the horse IL
good faith, were kept from testifyirg by
threats, force and fraud Of deputy
sheriff, who represented to them II they
would not testify th8t he would see the
defendant through all tight. The wit
nesses being present at the trial for
the purpose of lestIiying left at the sug-
gestion of ssid deputy Held DIV the
court That the evidence was sufficient
sHd charge correct, no error shown BY
the bill Of exception. Discretion in ever
ruling molten for new trikl rot ABUSED.
Affirmed.
Hooks vs.. the State; McLennsn. Con-
VlCtion under Art. GS4 Penal Code for
tearing down panel Of fence belonging
20 Mrs. Cogle. Hooks was the tsnaut
of Mrs. Ccgle, snd tore down oEe panel
Of the dividing terce belonging to Mrs.
Ccgleto give him more convenient pass
way during TIE time ne occupied the
fs1IA; ne did this without Mrs. C.'s con-
sent. Held: That the conviction Is er-
roreouF; tenant in possession OF leased
premises is the owner thereof until ths
txpiration Of his lease. II App. 600 ]
He has the right during SAID time TO nkke
sny responsible legitimate use OF the
premises. Reversed and remanded.
Wilson, Judge.
To,liver va. the State; Falls. Convic-
ton for receiving 81 oVercoat, knowing
It to have been stolen. Held: That there
is no evidence in the record to sustain
the conviction. Defendant Was found IL
possession CT an old ragged overcoat
which the prosecuting witness Identified
asa coat which had been stolen from him
thirteen months prior to Defendants be
ing in possession of it. There is not
particle of evidence showing O. tending to
show that the defendant st any tina knew
the coat had bs en- stolen. Reversed ana
remgnded. Willsop, Judge.
Rushing IS. State; Wise. In this CASE
the state, over the objections OF the de-
PENDANT, wse permitted to prove that On
the morning OF the alleged assault the
defendant, through his brother, he not
being present, that mis- brother, defendant,
wanted to plead guilty. The county St
torrey ws5 permitted, on the statement
made the court that he would show It's
msterislity to prove that fact, but declined
to inform the court what such facts we're.
Held: Thst the evidence shculd not have
been admitted on tie eq1iyocal and
uncertain statement OF toe county
attorney that lie expected to prove
its sdmissibility and the error was made
more prediudical by the courts failure to
exclude the testimony from the jury. It
was error to permit the state to prove
the good character OF the prosecuting
witness, Miller, for truth and verscity, it
not having been put in issue except by
cor act of testimony. The bill OF e1cep-
ton referred to by counsel for the defend
ant wss refused to be allowed by the trial
Judge, who states thst it is Incorrect; 1t
cannot be considered as bill Of excep-
tion. Reversed and remanded. Wilson,
Judge.
Conviction for one head Of meat cattle.
The Assistant Attorney General does rot
ask an affirmsnce, Blu: simply refers
the matter to the court. We are OF the
opinion that the evidence IS too unsstls-
factory, incorclusive and insufficient to
warrant the conviction. Reversed and
remanded. White, Presiding Judge.
Woodal vs.. the Safe, Knox county.
This is 8 conviction for horse theft, being
. companion csse with that Of Willis
supra. TIE Assistant Attorney General
confessor error. When the case was
called for trial and the state announced
the defendant stated that he was not
40. 1,for +ry.I HAVING teen in CUSTODY