Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1894-10-23


mum" w
synopsis of Decisions ny Court of
Criminal Appeals.
Tyler. Tex, oct. 2O.3rhe following
onIninps v,or. today deliverad in the
.,., ,,-
court Oh criminal "Ppcu'S'
I.ayfette Pars0ns vs.. the state-Ap-
[ neal from Titus county. This conviction
{ d. Co., tta,,..,-... = ,,,, ,,,,,,, ,,,i ,t,,
- ''' 40 ~ ''-'' '' ''e
| one question presented Tor discussion
! Is the suniclency Of the Indictment TO
/ Charge tbo nrro,es omittiny formal
49,.
phrtS ihe indictment ch"rses 'hat APP
/ pelant did then and there unlnwfully
| 20 into and near n publIc place. towit:
! Gto,t.-... .,...i,..,,. - ala ,t,.,
''t'' l'N'o'i'''N'' '''' "''
ana there laugh and tax In
manner calculated to disturb the in
bohitants tbsreor said CIadevot,r
sehoolhouse peins theh ana there
place to which people did then and
thrn rasorted' for the nprnnsa Of busi-
nass ,..,sa,t,,, ~ a,,,,,,.,,a,, a.,,t,,s.
''''7' ''''
I the peace ana dignity OF the state.
| While a little lnartictic and not free
/ from grammatical criticism. yet it
! sufIir,antlv- cba,c.s th. statutory. or-
] go, .,s,,.,.,.,, A.. -. a., , or
penal code. The point urged Is that 1t
t ,.t ,,,.., ~ ....,,,, NO.. a.,
~ - ~ M - -
ti,nH 70, ia W. a., Nj. ,,
tention. II is usually sufficient In the
| Indictment to charge the offense In the
| language Of the statutp. The allegn-
ton that appellant acted "in a manner
calculated 10 disturb The inbauitants."
etc, sufficiently aycrn Inc fact that p.o-
/ pie were there assembled The tudg-
/ iuent ia afBrmrd Davilsnn /
Jesse Hammond ys tho rtato-Ap.
neal from Titus county. rrbls rs a
| COMPANION 10 tho rorpgniur cnsa tho
| only difference bplntr In the ,ss AZ tbe
torn Commonly asspmbled" where the
statute uses mo term "r9umonlv re-
| sort.r The two terms are ~ tbn same
[ import and the Indictment Is guiicisnt
| CWlIson's Grim pr5r mr. 19S5 ma
conviction would be pleaded i'm bar Of
| tense The htdgment is oGirrnrd D.,-
/ idsnn. J.
Tom McGuire Va tho stato.- \pnaai
! from Dallas county. This Is.nn nnpeoi
I from conviction for assault ia rnpe
| punlsntnei,f fnss,,sed hrin sc,sn ,.S5r,
! lllIlllNllllHGlis w ME Tho charge
| tho court is subject Ia crttIcisn7 ot,d
l contains Irrelevant mnttsr vct s,,Sb
matter wa, not cnIclIintod to nrci,,5Ics
/ the dGr,ndaupa rights When oUniisJ
| TO the fact Inc cburr, rla,ri, siatc,
/ the law,-Qnd we see M ,,5so1 f., re-
1 verse for amy error thereIu Tho owl.
/ deuc, sttppnrts thc ronyicti,,, MA th..
! Judgment Is affirmed simi,Ins n
! Jim Lane VS.. Inc stata' ai,ni,i rr,,,,
/ Shelby county. This onpeaI liz fro,,'
/ "a conviction for theft punishns,t a.
/ se8aad bong nvs years lnplls"nn,a,t
Appcllapt contends maj mo rn,,,.t
/ oricd I'm permitting the stat, IN M.
amdavlts. enniestinir. not tb,. dlti,.,,r,
hui Inc fact thnt ths abss,,t ,,.i' ,,.,s,
would TESTIFY as stated In t1. me-.
! ton for continuance. N "a irnc Nat
| the court erred In This INT We 500 No.
! renson 10 reverse tho cause fnr ,,,ie
! reason. since. II the testimon, nr.t nc
/ absent witness were true. il w,,iid
have boon only attendants ,yniapa-
tIon 10 the effect that tho stolen
uropcrty. 15i mounds az haco, Inn,,5
! buried in his Garden. was pl1ccd th"re
by his consent by two other marbles
while tho testimony IN the casa chow,
] ,ha. ~. ~. ~. ~ -. "