Case Name: NEWMAN v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1911-01-18
Citations: 134 S.W. 688
Docket Number: 
Parties: NEWMAN v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 134
Pages: 688–689

Head Matter:
NEWMAN v. STATE.
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Jan. 18, 1911.
On Motion for Rehearing, March 1, 1911.)
1. Physicians and Surgeons (§ 6 ) — Practicing Without Authority — Criminal Prosecution.
On a prosecution for practicing medicine without having filed the required certificate, the defense was that accused was practicing as a masseur, and the court charged that if defendant did not charge for his services as a masseur, ■or for treatment by any method or system, and receive pay therefor, he should be acquitted, and that a masseur, in his particular sphere, is not required to secure a certificate. Held, that the charge fairly submitted the defense.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Physicians and Surgeons, Dec. Dig. § 6. ]
On Motion for Rehearing.
2. Physicians and Surgeons (§ 6 ) — Practicing Without Authority — Criminal Prosecution.
On a prosecution for practicing medicine without having filed the required certificate, evidence held sufficient to sustain a finding that defendant was treating disease by some method and charging therefor.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Physicians and 'Surgeons, Dec. Dig. § 6. ]
Appeal from Kendall County Court; H. Theis, Judge.
J. M. Newman was convicted of unlawfully engaging in the practice of medicine without having filed the required certificate, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
W. F. Hays and George Powell, for appellant. John A. Mobley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
For other cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
HARPER, J.
In this case appellant was convicted in the county court of Kendall county of the offense of unlawfully engaging in the practice of medicine without first having registered and filed for record the certificate required, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $100 and five days' imprisonment in the county jail.
1. Appellant's first assignment of error •complains of the action of the court in overruling his motion to quash the indictment. An indictment in terms exactly similar to this was passed on by this court in Newman v. State, 124 S. W. 956, and held to be a valid indictment.
2. In his second assignment of error appellant insists that one who practices as a "masseur" is not guilty of any offense under Acts 30th Leg. pp. 224 to 228, and that the facts are insufficient to sustain the judgment. Whether or not the facts are sufficient was submitted to the jury trying the cause under a proper charge, and the jury find against appellant's contention. The court, at the instance of appellant, gave the two following special charges:
(1) "If you find from the evidence that the defendant did not charge for his services as a masseur, or for treatment by any method or system, and receive pay for such treatment between the 27th day of May, 1909, and the 21st day of June, 1909, you will acquit him, and say by your verdict, 'We, the jury, find the defendant not guilty.' "
(2) "You are instructed that a masseur, in his particular sphere of labor, is not required to secure a certificate authorizing him to practice medicine, and if you believe from the evidence that defendant, as a masseur, practiced within the particular sphere of masseurs, you will acquit him."
These charges submit to the jury fairly the defense of appellant, and the ease of Newman v. State, 124 S. W. 956, so fully presents and discusses the question of when one who uses the massage treatment for disease would become liable, we deem it unnecessary to enter into an extended discussion of the question, but merely refer to that decision.
The judgment is affirmed.