Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-11-28
THE HIGHER COURTS.
synopses Of Decisions Rendered at the Pres
ent Tyler sitting.
COURT OF APPEALS.

/
TYLER. TEX, Nov. 26.-Geo. Scott
VS.. the State; from Rusk. Conviction
for murder in the fret degree, with the
death penalty assessed. Appellant 10
hide the shameful results OF an iu-
cestuous Intercourse with his own sister
shot aud killed her and then threw her
body in a well, where il was subse-
| quentIy discovered. He made a con-
| fessIOn of his guilt, and on the trial took
the stand himself and related the MUIR
| der IN all its detail:. He entered plea
of guilty and the jury guve him the
| death penalty. /. This court will not
| reverse because of mere irregularities be-
q cen the veuire and the copy of the
| same served on Il defendant. 9. Each
| juror was accepted by the appellant; shat
is, he did not exhaust his challenges, and
! cannot complain OF the venlre. 3. APP
| pellaut after being duly admonIshed by
! the court, persisted in pleading guilty.
| and the evidence as we find IL in the rec
| ord Establishes his guilt beyond all con-
controversy, and in addition to the tes-
ti,nony of his own Witnesses, appellant
| on the stand told the story of his guilt
and made no pretense OF his innocence.
l
nothing which should mitigate the eX-
IRENE penalty OF the law in this case.
I affirmed. White, L. j.
Giles Ham vs. the State; from Risk.
! Fornication. !. The evidence is wholly
! Insufficient TO sustain the conviction. 2.
| The evidence being largely circumstau-
| tial the court erred in refusing special
! requested charge relative thereto. Re-
versed and reInanded. White, p. J.
JEFF Burleson vs.. the State; from
4 essersrone. Assault to rape. l. While
fthe jury were deliherating upon their
! verdict, II member of the jury stated TO
! his fellows that defendpnt had already
/ served one term III the pcntentiary, and
il was also stated by another member
that there were five or Elk indictments
pending against him and also that if he
I was convicted in this case of nn aggra-
waited assault he could not give a cou-
Wet bond for the fine and costs, but
would have TO lay IN juil ut the expense
of the tax payers, etc. One of the
jurors testified that these statements ill.,
tiuenced him in rendering verdict
finding defendant guilty of felony,
aud that without the statements he
would not have agreed to the verdict
herein. Held: The showing entitled
erred in overrulirg the motion. re-. G..
p, Art. 777-z7 Arp.-322- 20 App.
673-6 app. 524-l3 app. 81. Reversed
and remauded. Wilson, j.
John j. Cannon vs.. the State; from
Colorado. SwIndlInG. ]. In al indirt-
nent for swludliug il 10 essential 10 al
lege the acquisition of the property 10y
the defendDnt. Unless the property has
been acquired by him the Offense has not
been committed. In the Indictment IN
this case there is no direct allegation that
the defendant acquired the property. IL
is alleged that the property WAS delivered
ana paid 10 him by the alleged swiniled
party, but such allegation is not i'll our
opinion equivalent to alleging i'll the Ian
Euage of The statute that the defendant
acquired the property. The indictment
is insufficient in matter of substance
und the judgment is reversed and the
prosecution dismissed. Wilson, j.
Dock Blacks hear VS.. the State; from
Falls. Theft of cattle. l. The accom-
plice testimony is corroborated and the
testimony is sufficient. 2. No charges
SHSfe asked and none given calculated
TO injure appellant. 3. No bills of ex-
ception 10 admission of testimony, and
no error. Affirmed. Per ouriHm.
JHlDts BTNGH Vi TUE oAhit, from an
Zandt. Aggravated assault AMI battery.
/. Evidence sustairs conviction and
charge correct. =. Bills of exception
show no error. Affirmed. Per curium.
Robert Wynn VS.. the State; from
Smith. Simple assault. /. The evil
dence and charge are both suf-
ficient. 2. The question OF intent |
was correctly and fuirly submitted |
to the jury. 3. This court will Judge Us
10 the regularity OF verdict by the |
manuer in which It appears in the record. |
Affirmed. Per curiam.
. Lsason Peak vs.. the State: from Rusk. |
the peace. /. The officer
who administered oath to the complaint |
certified who the complainant was, and |
the motion TO Quash and in arrest of |
judgment was properly over-ruied. 9.
No statement of facts or bills of excep-
tlon. Affirmed. Per curtain.
Robert Carter VS.. the State; from
Navarro. Motion 10 dismiss appeal. |.
The motion of the assistant attorney
general TO dismiss does not suffi GENTLY
show thin escape of appellant from GUS
tody pending this appeal. Motion over
ruled. Per curtain.
TompkiDs Machinery Company vs.. s.
V. Cruthis ct al; from Rock wall. |.
Inc. notes, less the credits, were within
the jurisdiction of the justice court, and
although one of the makers of the notes
testified that he did not make the pay
ments credited, there is no proof that
said payments were not made by the
other maker. 2. No reversible error.
Affirmed. Per curium.
T.. 5. Bridges VS.. the State; from
Ellis. Assault TO murder. l. Charge
Of court full and free from material
error. .. Bills of exception disclose no
szhex for Mhfch the Judgment should be
l4S+rskd Affirmed. Per curiam.
Geo. Wallis IS. tine State; from Tar
rant. Selling liquor OH Sunday. l. In
formation and charge of court correct
2. No statement of fact or bills Of ex-
reption and no error in the conviction.
Per curtain.
Robert Carter VS.. the State; from Ma
varro. Theft. l. Information good.
; he property was Nned in common
by the husband and wife, aud the hus-
band icing absent. and the wife in
charge OF the same, il was proper to
lllege ownership in the wife. No error.
Affirmed. Per curtain.
Jesse Terrell We. the State; from Ma
lNfco. Adultery. l. Evidence shows |