Case Name: Dan Williams v. The State
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1879
Citations: 5 Tex. Ct. App. 615
Docket Number: 
Parties: Dan Williams v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Court of Appeals Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 615–616

Head Matter:
Dan Williams v. The State.
1. Practice — Charge or the Court. — In a prosecution for a misdemeanor, the court below is not required to charge the jury, except by request of either party; and then the charge cannot be given verbally, except by consent of the parties.
2. Verdict. —It is not necessary that the verdict in a criminal case should be signed by the foreman of the jury.
Appeal from the County Court of Waller. Tried below before the Hon. W. S. Wright, County Judge.
The appeal was from a conviction arid fine of $100, for aggravated assault and battery.
A. J. Harvey and Boone & Griffin, for the appellant.
Thomas Ball, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

Opinion:
White, J.
On the trial below, defendant saved a bill of exceptions to the action of the court in charging the jury verbally. This, under the statute, makes it obligatory upon this court that the judgment should be reversed. Pasc. Dig., art. 3067 ; Jordan v. The State, decided at this present term of court, ante, p. 422.
The other error complained of, viz., that the verdict is not signed by the foreman, is not well taken. Morton v. The State, 3 Texas Ct. App. 510.
Beversed and remanded.