Case Name: PARISH v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1919-01-08
Citations: 209 S.W. 678
Docket Number: No. 5154
Parties: PARISH v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 209
Pages: 678–682

Head Matter:
PARISH v. STATE.
(No. 5154.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Jan. 8, 1919.
On Motion for Rehearing, March 12, 1919.)
1. Homicide <&wkey;250 — Evidence — Sufficiency.
In a prosecution for the murder of an 18 year old Mexican boy by a soldier, who was a passenger in his automobile, circumstantial evidence hold sufficient to sustain a verdict of guilty.
On Motion for Rehearing.
2. Ckiminal Law <&wkey;552(3) — Conviction — Sufficiency of Circumstantial Evidence.
In order to convict on circumstantial evidence, it is not essential that the circumstances proved should to a moral certainty exclude every hypothesis that the act may have been committed by another person, known or unknown.
3. Criminal Law <&wkey;>552(2) — Conviction — Sufficiency of Proof by Circumstantial Evidence.
When conviction depends upon circumstantial evidence alone, it is essential to prove each necessary fact beyond a reasonable doubt before it can become the basis of any inference adverse to accused, although each fact thus proved need not, standing alone, be of sufficient weight to establish guilt.
Appeal from District Court, Bexar County; W. S. Anderson, Judge.
Ratio P. Parish was convicted of murder, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Abernathy & Smith, of McKinney, for appellant.
B. B. Hendricks, Asst Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
MORROW, J.
The conviction is for murder and punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for 20 years. The evidence is circumstantial.
The deceased, Elíseo Ornelas, appears to have been a Mexican, owner of a Ford automobile which he operated for hire; that during the night of October 9th appellant, in company with one Foreman, both of them being soldiers in the United States army, made a contract with the deceased to take them in his car to a point in the vicinity of San Antonio; that the two soldiers entered the car with the driver, one of them sitting on the front and the other on the back seat The cousin of the deceased suggested or wanted to go along, hut the appellant and his companion objected on the ground that they were to bring others back in the car and there would not be room. Deceased appears to have been a boy about IS years of age. He was found the following morning about 7 o'clock by some persons passing along the road. He had wounds upon his head, his skull was crushed, and he was in an unconscious and dying condition. He was in the road, and near his body were automobile tracks corresponding in size and description to those which were on the deceased's car. There was in the road near these tracks, and not far from the body, some blood in several places and evidence of a fight or struggle having taken place. The deceased had a small amount of money, between $7 and $8 at the time he made the contract, and this had been taken from him and his pockets turned inside out, though his watch and chain had not been removed. Near the body there was found some tobacco and cigarettes, and a button from a soldier's coat. Tlie car was found on the morning of the 10th of October at a point some distance from the scene of the homicide. It was located near some buildings that were being newly constructed in Camp Travis. There were stains of blood at various places upon the car, engine, footboard, and running board. In the car was found a cap, which was identified as belonging to deceased, and which had a dent in it, indicating that it had been struck by some object. While the persons in charge of the work and the sheriff were examining the car, some one of them handed the sheriff a coat. This was a military coat, and there was evidence introduced identifying the coat as belonging to the appellant. There was evidence, also, that the coat was of a different character from, that used by the other soldiers at Camp Travis, it being similiar to those formerly used by soldiers, and it was claimed by the witnesses that it had been brought from another camp, at which the appellant and his companion were formerly stationed. One of the buttons had been torn from the coat, and the button picked up- near the body of deceased was of the same character as those remaining on the coat, though .there is nothing to show that the buttons on that coat were peculiar or different from those on the clothing worn by the numerous soldiers stationed at Camp Travis. There was a small amount of blood on the coat. The person who handed the coat to the sheriff was not introduced as a witness, and it is only from circumstances that the inference is to be drawn that the coat was picked up by one of the several people who were attracted to the scene of the car after it was found and while it was undergoing examination by the sheriff.
A very short time after the homicide, appellant and Foreman were transferred, with the company to which they belonged, from Camp Travis, at San Antonio, to Camp Bowie, in Ft. Worth, and were there arrested by the sheriff, being identified by the brother of deceased, who was present at the time that the contract between the deceased and the appellant and his companion was entered into.
No questions other than the sufficiency of the evidence are presented. We are unable to reach the conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict.
The judgment is affirmed.
©=»For other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes