The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1894-01-12
THE HIGHER COURTS
rnE sYNorsEs or DECISIONS As
HANDED DOWN.
RenderinEs OF the state Courts Of
Last Resort In Causes Taken up
ON Appeal From the Lower
judicial tribunals.

HHN HHH HHH HIH HI.HHH
siaersi = Il smith. cieTk sitting "a
lntiaH
p,r.- r, January 10 vouoystn,.
arc cases ai'poNf4 81 ~ e"u' ~ S''hAlN'
appca.H
yyt-i f.sr,tn.u ~ state fr4m Tartan.:
-. . a.
eoi'N'etoh LOT UlN'"V' W wy s'.'"N
gree. There ia neither oul 81 eHcep-
tons OF statement Of facts IA the record.
'fp'n"'' 0'H''''''''
submits 70 the jury ihe prepos'i'on' That
Il appellant, beng advised or agreed %
the killing ana vas present or hsinr
.t--,, $3.50
~, $500 ~ 800
''''.s 40 ~ t.'.,,,,. - ~ s",
49,, ~ ,,,,,t.,.,,tt.,, s,'.t,,- 80,
~ ~, -,t.,,'l,It 10
,,,, ~, ~ .,sr,. ~ tsn co,,, 40 AZ.
,',y3, ~" ~ .,,tyrsc mn. ,,'t NE W.
ann '''''N''.-, '''''
yt-ru ,,s...., -, -r,,.,,.. ,.-.....,t,,.,
tor f6egt .rbr r,,.y rrrors e.,ssr,.t 49,.
,b,,sl ,,l.,,. ,,,., .1r3...4,is,,,. - ..,,t
-, -, ~. t,,i,,+a,',.. ,,,,, -, a.
/ rstthrr s,,.,t,,.r, III f,rfs ra. S.1i.
! u, .rr,,l,r tb.v Tan NOE h. e,,..,t.r,4
1 Jitrmerf afarpr,.l slml.in. e,frc
{ ". T. Iieh,foot from Dallas, .onvi--
I firn o. liIfy,.sr, t.n.v an. r,t,,.t f
+ u.ty t1.l ~ r,.aanteG namsiy. trstFr,-
J q enry ~ .vtlsg,.. 40 supuart tbt N.,.f'rl
: so objection ss made Go The strrfi.5..tif, OF
I evidence. or 10 tho charr. OF th. court
-rhe court charged the law apr;Ir,tlr IN
/ the Only defense presented. is,,yli. THAT
1 appellant purchased the goods from othar
I parties ln DALLAS. The jurS. did ,l5t take mss
I view OF ,hc case. Tho verdict Is supported
ilas. Judge
/ WIN Nnrbrr, from Tarraut. convicted
Z Tor rape Tnr verdict IS complained vi
I because % does not state tle count upon
/ which % Sc based THIS is u0t necessary.
( Hs both counts are ryud The verdict is
( signed by thc foreman The oNis~tlgue 10
The charge are not sustained by the rec.
, ord lie" rs not used but "hys and n
IL WERE the mistake would not affect the
/ meaning. judgment ariyme4 Hurt
/ T.. J.
I J1nn Daley. from Dallas. conviction for
I burglary The Indictment alleges thut
Jesse Verhine'a house wa. entered with
intent 10 steal Vhs court Instructed the
jury That II they believed from the EVIL.
( dence that defendant entered the house OF
John Verhiur etc There is no statement
Of facts in me record. and We presume
stance tending 70 show that appellant had
entered the house OF John NeThmc with
intent TO steal and II there was no sueh
T evidence the mistake was harm leHs 30
objection was reserved 60 thls mis- take at
thc aim. and 10 authorize q reversal an
pa!laut must show probable INJURY This
does not appear That thi. was mistake
OF name is made evident when tie charge
as "a whole ia considered. Judgment az
urned Hurt r. j.
Horace Ben. from Tarrant: conviction
Hfu. r.H
complains OF thr introduction In evil
dpnce OF the acts. Statements and threats
appellant was not present ana pe com
sprscy had been shown % which he was
=, marty. The court below adds 10 each
hIr Of exceptions in regard 90 this matter
that this testimony WAS not introduced
uutil after the State mad nd3ucej test-
mony showing the participation Of Bell
which cven,mi-I in the death Of wal
Ter" II this D. 30. the acts statements
competent EVIDENCE ~ The abaencr o. a.
statement OF fsrts jhe presumption b.
thar the State adlue~1 such evidence as
made the acts. declarations ana threats
Ben must he INDUCED
VIII Anderson. from Tarrant. con, lctiou
for burglary Appellant complains of tGt
action N The rpurl ln permitting ,bo State
to Introduce a. witnesses Hughes sni
beck. and permitting them 10 TESTIFY, bf-
cause the rule had been Invoked. The w.t-
bot had remained in court sud heard The
other witnesses testify No hl ~ eErrp-
tions 20 this matter was reserved. aud %
ia mot properiy before uA II "a blH had
been reserved. Il does not follow that The
Judgment Fhould he reversed. because me
court may not have adjusted iH discretion
In regard 20 this matter Atlrmrt SIM
Lemon Gilbert from Dallas. conviction
for crap shooting There D. neither stAse-
mont III facts nor bli!s Of exception I'm the
record ana We are unable 10 appreciate
h. force OF me only error asairnsb that
mo verdict was contrary 10 the law mad
u Kennedy. from Crayson. conviction
g,~ i,Yrgtar,. There are no b.us OF sN-