Case Name: Eugene ENGLISH, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1960-03-23
Citations: 338 S.W.2d 446
Docket Number: No. 31766
Parties: Eugene ENGLISH, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 338
Pages: 446–447

Head Matter:
Eugene ENGLISH, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.
No. 31766.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
March 23, 1960.
Rehearing Denied June 8, 1960.
Charles William Tessmer, Dallas (On Appeal Only), for appellant
Henry Wade, Criminal Dist. Atty., Frank Watts, Thomas B. Thorpe, Philip Burleson, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
MORRISON, Presiding' Judge.
The offense is murder; the punishment, 10 years.
It is undisputed that appellant shot and killed the deceased. Appellant's plea of self defense was rejected by the jury, and we find the evidence sufficient to support their verdict. The question of the competency of the witness Lue Bertha Russell appears to have been waived when she was permitted to testify with no objection as to competency. Parrish v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 320 S.W.2d 853.
Appellant's complaint as to argument cannot be appraised because not properly before us in a bill of exception. Appellant submitted his bill to the trial court on December 8, 1959; he qualified the same, and appellant excepted to such qualifications but did nothing further. We have recently in two cases (Wortham v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 333 S.W.2d 158, and Willie v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 334 S.W.2d 159) had before us for consideration the recent amendment of Article 760d, V.A.C.C.P. In the amendment no provision is made for a trial judge to file his own bill of exception in a case, and no necessity exists for such a bill. The amendment as written clearly provides that if dissatisfied with the court's reasons for not approving his bills of exception, the defendant must resort to bystanders' bills or he will have none.
Finding the evidence sufficient to support the conviction and no reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.