Case Name: Fred Albrecht v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1919-05-07
Citations: 85 Tex. Crim. 519
Docket Number: No. 5175
Parties: Fred Albrecht v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 85
Pages: 519–524

Head Matter:
Fred Albrecht v. The State.
No. 5175.
Decided May 7, 1919.
Rehearing denied June 25, 1919.
1.—Murder—Notice of Appeal—Practice on Appeal.
Where, upon appeal, the record disclosed that' the same failed to show that any notice of appeal was entered of record in the minutes of the court below, the appeal must be dismissed. Following Young v. State, 60 Texas Grim. Rep., 209. However, where the defects in the record were thereafter remedied, the appeal is reinstated.
2.—Same—Evidence—Dying Declarations—Predicate.
Where, upon appeal from a conviction of murder, it appeared from the record that deceased was told by his medical attendant that he must die, that he sent for a minster who administered the dying sacraments; that the deceased was suffering intensely and was shot through the stomach; that he talked to his brother about his business and expressed commiseration for his wife and children, all of which indicated his consciousness of approaching death at the time of his statement that he was shot by the defendant, etc., the same was admissible in evidence as a dying declaration. Following Miller v. State, 27 Texas Grim. Rep., 63, and other cases.
3. —Same—Rule Stated—Dying Declarations.
In order to make a dying declaration admissible in evidence the deceased must not only be in a dying condition but he must actually believe that he is so. This may be inferred from the statement of the party and also from the nature of the wound and other circumstances. Following Krebs v. State, 3 Texas Grim. App., 348, and other cases.
4. —Same—Manslaughter—Charge of Court—Adequate Cause—Insulting Words.
Where, upon trial of murder, the court’s charge on manslaughter applied the law to the facts in the case, and instructed the jury that insulting words or gestures were not adequate cause, there was no reversible error. Following: Wood v. State, 71 Texas Grim. Rep., 398, 159 S. W. Rep., 1183, and other cases; especially in the instant case, where defendant denied that such'language of the deceased affected him in any way but that he acted in self-defense.
5.—Same—Self-Defense—Charge of Court—Requested Charge.
Where, upon trial of murder, the court gave a correct charge under the law of self-defense as applicable to the facts in the case, there was no error in the court’s refusal to submit a requested charge as to defendant’s right to act in his self-defense against any danger or apparent danger which theory was not raised by the evidence.
Appeal from the District Court of Victoria. Tried below before the Hon. John M. Green.
Appeal from a conviction of murder; penalty, five years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
The opinion states the case.
Fly & Ragsdale, for appellant.
On question of dying declaration: Ledbetter v. State, 23 Texas Crim. Rep., 247; Irby v. State, 25 id., 203; Meyers v. State, 33 Texas Crim. Rep., 204; Edmonson v. State, 41 Texas, 496; Craven v. State, 49 Texas Crim. Rep., 781; Phillips v. State, 50 id., 127.
On question of court’s charge on self-defense; Cartwright v. State, 16 Texas Crim. App., 473; Beam v. State, 24 id., 11; Norris v. State, 42 Texas Crim. Rep., 559; Mayhew v. State, 65 Texas Crim. Rep., 290, 144 S. W. Rep., 229; Black v. State, 65 Texas Crim. Rep., 336, 145 S. W. Rep., 944.
On question of notice of appeal: Lewis v. State, 39 S. W. Rep., 370; Brannan v. State, 76 Texas Crim. Rep., 492, 175 S. W. Rep., 697.
On question °of writ of certiorari and nunc pro tunc order: Clay v. State, 68 Texas Crim. Rep., 250, 150 S. W. Rep., 430; Bruce v. State, 76 Texas Crim. Rep., 72, 173 S. W. Rep., 301.
F. B. Hendricks, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
On question of notice of appeal: Harkrider v. State, 48 Texas Crim. Rep., 573, and cases cited in the opinion.
On question of adequate cause: Davis v. State, 57 Texas Crim. Rep., 545; Washington v. State, 50 id., 356; Johnson v. State, 74 Texas Crim. Rep., 179, 167 S. W. Rep., 733; Wilson v. State, 71 Texas Crim. Rep., 399, 160 S. W. Rep., 83, and cases cited in the opinion.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, Judge.
was convicted in the District Court of Victoria County of the offense of murder and his punish-men 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 ap peal 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 Texas Crim. App., 321; Solari v. State, 3 Texas Crim. App., 482; Johnson v. State, 8 Texas Crim. App., 671; Truss v. State, 38 Texas Crim. Rep., 291; Lenox v. State, 55 Texas Crm. Rep., 259; Thomas v. State, 56 Texas Crim. Rep., 246; Young v. State, 60 Texas Crim. Rep., 290; Rios v. State, 76 Texas Crim. Rep., 364, 174 S. W. Rep., 1050.
The appeal is dismissed.
Dismissed.