Case Name: ALBRECHT v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1919-05-07
Citations: 215 S.W. 327
Docket Number: No. 5178
Parties: ALBRECHT v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 215
Pages: 327–329

Head Matter:
ALBRECHT v. STATE.
(No. 5178.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
May 7, 1919.
On Motion for Rehearing, June 25, 1919.
Application to Withdraw Second Petition for Rehearing Granted Oct. 22, 1919.)
1. CRIMINAL LAW <&wkey;10Sl — APPEAL DISMISSED IN ABSENCE OX NOTICE OF’APPEAL.
Where no notice of appeal was given or entered in the minutes of the court below as required by statute, the appeal will 'be dismissed.
On Motion for Rehearing.
2. Homicide &wkey;>203(3) — Foundation sufficient to admit dying declarations.
Where evidence showed deceased was told by his medical attendant that he must die, and he sent for a minister who administered the dying sacrament, and talked with his brother about his business, and expressed commiseration for his wife and children, a sufficient foundation was laid for admitting in evidence his dying declaration.
3. Homicide &wkey;>309(l) — Instruction as to adequate cause for manslaughter. .
A charge on manslaughter in regard - to adequate cause held not too restrictive.
4. Homicide <&wkey;45 — Insulting words not ADEQUATE CAUSE FOR MANSLAUGHTER.
In view of Vernon’s Ann. Pen. Code 1916, art. 1131, insulting words or gestures are not adequate cause such as would render a killing manslaughter.
5. Homicide <&wkey;309(6) — Instruction on defense NOT RAISED HARMLESS.
In a homicide case, where accused took the stand himself and testified that he shot deceased “because I was trying to defend myself,” and nowhere claimed that any language used by deceased affected him in any way or made him angry, he cannot complain that a charge on manslaughter was too restrictive in that it stated that insulting words are not adequate cause.
6. Homicide <&wkey;300(7) — Evidence not requiring INSTRUCTIONS ON SELF-DEFENSE.
In a homicide case, evidence held not to require the court to charge on self-defense.
7. Criminal law <&wkey;814(3) — Submission of THEORY NOT RAISED BY EVIDENCE.
The court is not required to submit a theory of any case unless there is evidence in the case raising such issue.
Appeal from District Court, Victoria County; John M. Green, Judge.
Fred Albrecht was convicted of murder, and he appeals..
Appeal dismissed.
Fly & Ragsdale, of Victoria, for appellant.
E. B. Hendricks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, J.
Appellant was convicted in the district court of Victoria county of the offense of murder, and his punishment fixed at five years in the penitentiary.
It is moved in this case by the Assistant Attorney General that the appeal be dismissed because it does not appear from the record that notice of appeal was given and entered in the minutes of the district court, as required by statute. An inspection of the transcript discloses that the same fails to show that any notice of appeal was entered of record in the minutes of the court below. The authorities of this state are unanimous in holding that the statute requiring this to be done is imperative. Long v. State, 3 Tex. App. 321; Solari v. State, 3 Tex. App. 482; Johnson v. State, 8 Tex. App. 671; Truss v. State, 38 Tex. Cr. R. 291, 43 S. W. 92; Lenox v. State, 55 Tex. Cr. R. 259, 116 S. W. 816; Thomas v. State, 56 Tex. Cr. R. 246, 119 S. W. 846; Young v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 290, 131 S. W. 413; Rios v. State, 76 Tex. Cr. R. 364, 174 S. W. 1050.
The appeal is dismissed.
^m?For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes