The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1896-12-25
HIGHEST COURT DECISIONS.
synopsis Of Opinions Handed Down
at the Latest Sitting.
The COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
Hardy Case from Navarro County
Attained - Batson's Forty Year
Sentence >tnnds-itapc Case.

Tyler. Texas, December 2s.--The follow
ing decisions were yesterday handed down
by the court OF criminal appeals
JOE PASSAYOLI VS. STATE. from Gall
weston; conviction for horse theft and
given five years Affirmed
There was no error in the charge OF the
court and the evidence is sufficient.
Opinion BY Hurt p. }.
I HARDY VS.. STATE. from Navarro. this
/ case heard on rehearing.
| This was a conviction for nanslaughter
and not murder. as stated in the original
| opinion. and the original charge having
been sent up, We find the said charge reads
"that in order 10 reduce the killing TO
mansiSughter on the grounds that prior
assault made BY deceased, they must
believe that such assault and battery pro-
1uced pain or blocdshed and not pain and
blootshed, as claimed ANA was correct.
There wss no error N refusing 10 quash
the special yenire The charge on self-de-
Tense is correct and complete. Affirmed,
Opinion by Davidson, j.
ELLIS VS.. STATE. from Galveston coun
ty. conviction for theft OF money and
given TWO years.
There was no error in refusing to
charge On the misdemeauor phase OF the
case. The evidence is sufficient and juag-
meut affirmed.
Opinion by Hurt. z. J.
J. p Burns VS.. THE STATE, from Smith
county; convict on under article l69.
which provides that II any person shall
carry any pistol during the hours the
polls are cpcn within one half mile OF
any polling place he shall be punished
Appellant comedies that re is guilty Of
violating this article 1862, hut contends that
be should have been convicted untu article
40 which provides a less penalty and OF
which he Vas also guilty The facts os-
fabhsh his guilt In either case owe can
rot understand upon what principle the
yommiss on Of The ofiense defined in article
$40 would relieve the appellant from the
penalty offered boy article 1883. Affirmed
Opinion by Hunt. !.
BATsON vs.. STATE. from Madison coun.
~ convicted for murder in the second
degree and given fortyfive years.
There was no error with reference to the
admission Of the testimony of the witness
Bledsoe This conviction was had on the
testimony Of an accomplish sufficiently
corroborated. There Was TO error in The
charge OF the court and the evidence $
amply sufficient There was 10 error in
the admission of The testimony of the Wit
ness Mclver Affirmed
Opinion by Henderson, J.
CARGO vs.. STATE, from Pamela county;
conviction for theft OF hogs and given
two wears.
Appellants motion for new trial for
ncwly discovered testimony was properly
oyerruled because the witness Noel. whose
testimony was wanted was shown 10 be
iucompetcut TO testify at another trial and
no diligence shown with reference to ,ha
Client Affirmed.
Opinion by Davidson, J.
DUKE VS.. STATE, from Pamela county,
conviction for murder and given five
years.
The alleged newly discovered testimony
Of Boren would have been irrelevant. The
issue whether or not he was a principal in
said homicide was fairly submitted am!
tne jury found thai he was. Tho evidence
suppor's the verdict and it is affirmed
Opinion by Hurt J.. j.
FRANK WHITE VS. STATE, from Nc
Lehman county: conviction for horse
theft and given five years
Becauso no notlce Of appeal to This court
was given in the court below this appeal
Is dismissed.
Opinion by Davidson, J.
KING VS. STATE, from McIcnnan; con-
yi'tion for passing a forged instrument
and given two years
The Endorsement on the back of the al
legged forged instrument. it being no part
Of the contract and only being instructions
20 agents of one of the parties constitutes
no part of the forged instrument and need |
net be set ont in n" Indictment. and It Is
not "A variance. The indictment is suf !
ncjent. as is the evidence. Affirmed.
Opinion by Henderson, }.
MEYER vs. STATE from Comal county;
conviction for an assault to murder and |
given two years
The only question In the case was the in
tent with which he fired the shot. and that |
issue was fairly submitted IN the charge |
20 the jury, who found against the appel !
liant, and VIC mink the evidence supports
the finding We find no error in the |
record and the judgment is affirmed.
Opinion by Henderson, J.
VS.. STATE. from Tarrant
county conviction for an assault with !
the intent to commit robbery
There was no error in the charge with re-
spoct to alibi We think the evidence was
sufficient. The Judgment Is affirmed.
Opinion by Davidson, ].
SMITH vs.. STATE, from Milan 1.-TWO |
caeeS); convicted Tor arson and conspir- |
acy 20 commit arson.
Each case depended solely on the uncor !
roborated testimony of an accomplish and |
both must be reversed
Oplnlcn by Henderson, j.
SHELL vs.. STATE, from Robertson
county
There are two counts in the indictment. /
1nc charging rape by force and the second |
rape on a girl under 10 years The convo-
ion Is general an can he applied 10 either /
'onnt. The evidence is not sufficient to |
support n conviction under the second |
count The court erred In refusing 10 !