The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-05-07

dence OF declarations made by Nicks and
Bob Small made while negd iatipp sale
Of the cattle after they were stolen.
me court did not err In charging on
recent possession. The evidence show
led that defendant had made an exrIana,ior
of his possession OF the stolen cattle 10
parties who caught him in the act,
The evidence is sufficient.
Opinion by Henderson, J.
ED ARNOLD, from Llano county; CON
viction for swindling-AtHrmed
The charge. though general, is cor.
rect. II defendant desired more specisc
charge he should have asked it Tho
Indictment Is good one; and the evidence
is sufficient.
Opinion by Henderson, ].
MANUEL LOPEZ and LEONARDO LON.
GoElA, from Starr county; conviction
for cattle theft-Reversed
Tho conviction depends upon circum-
stantial evidence. The trial court erred
in falling TO charge the law applicable
to circumstantial evidence
Opinion by Davidson, j.
John ADAMS. from Guadalupe county.
conviction for murder in the second
degree-Affirmed.
we can not revise the action of the
court In refusing defendants application
for continuance because there is no
Dill OF exceptions in the record.
The evidence is sufficient.
Opinion by Davidson, ].
WILLIAM STUART from Waller county:
conviction for murder in the second de-
gr,e-Aftirmed.
The defendant insists that the court
erred In refusing to charge on manslauge-
ter There is no manslaughter In the
case. Dece, ased was killed by defendant
for an alleged assault made by the former
on the latters sister. 1t is shown that
the Killing took place at the second meet
Ing after the assault. not nt the first
The remarks of the States attorney
complained! of here. We're not objected to
at the time, indeed there lis no evidence
that they were ever made except the
bare statement to that effect in the mo-
lon for new rial.
The evidence is sufficient.
OPINION by Davidson. j.
NED CARTER. from Falls county, con-
victi'm for mans laurhior-Athrmed
Appellant was indicted and tried for
at a previous term and convicted
Of me nslaughter. This conviction was re-
vers'fd. whereupon an indictment was
'oun for manslaughter alone. On the
trial. defendant requested charge to
the effect that he should be acquitted
Il he jury believed him guilty of murder
IN either degree. This charge was re-
iu' Ied.
The court below did not err In refusing
lie charge requested. The evidence pre-
snts no issue of murder, but one of well
narked mapslaughter
The evidence is sufficient.
OPINION by Hende rson, ].
PERRY MORRISON. from Grayson coun-
ty conviction for assault with intent
to murder--Reversed.
The record contains thirty bills OF ex-
ceptions. Such a volumnous record of
bills of exceptions can serve no good
purpose and is unnecessary.
The evidence conflicted sharply ON the
issue as to whether or not defendant was
the aggressor in the difficulty in question.
The court admitted evidence of two other
difficulties which had previously occurred
between defendant and the prosecutor.
he trial court limited the effect of this |
evidence to the issue of motive and malice. |
1t refused to allow defendant TO intro |
JUICE eNiutHce showing the PARTICULARS |
Of the previous difficulties and that the
prosecutor had been the aggressor there
in. This was erroneous. The testimony |
should have been admitted in common |
fairness to defendant. 1t was relevant as
tending to show who was most likely
TO have been the aggressor in the difficulty
under inyeSti gation.
The defendant introduced three witnesses
who testified as TO his general reputation
for peace and quietude, whereupon The
court stated it would allow no more
testimony of this character. it appearing
that the State did not intend TO attack
defendants character for peace and
luietude Defendants counsel then stated
that he had not anticipated this ruling
and that there were other witnesses pres
snt who We're more familiar with defend
ants character than those who had been
introduced. The action of the court In
TO allow these other witnesses to
-estify was not timely and, considering
he sharply conflicting evidence, probably
'esulted In an injury to defendant
Opinion by Henderson, j.
EX PARTE, j. A. TITLE. from Dallas;
county: application for haheas corpus
reversed and REALTORS bail fixed al slVo;
and. in the event that he is unable to
give this bond on or before June IL, 1897,
it is ordered that he be released from
custody upon his own recognizance'
Rhlator was arrested under charge
T. incest in November 1896 On appliGa-
ion for habeas corpus, his bail was re-
iuced from $3.50 to $500. Being unable 4
o give this bond. relator was placed on
he county farm He then made second
APPLICATION. alleging that he was unabie !
o give any bond whatever that turth err
confinement would endanger his life, md
hat his case had been postponed u'Atii
'une IL, 1897, ON account of the abs hnce
II his stepdaughtar Rena FORD win
whom the crime is alleged to have been
committed Rena Ford is fugitive from |
Justice under Indictment for the same
,tfense as relator.
The case should not have been post
,oned. There must not only De some
expectation OF SECURING the |
attendance of the witness. but H. must |
urther appear that II present the witness
'0uld be required to testify.