Case Name: HARDEMAN v. STATE
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1923-02-21
Citations: 252 S.W. 503
Docket Number: No. 7459
Parties: HARDEMAN v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 252
Pages: 503–504

Head Matter:
HARDEMAN v. STATE.
(No. 7459.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Feb. 21, 1923.
On Motion for Rehearing, March 21, 1923.
State Rehearing Denied June 20, 1923.)
,1. Disorderly house <S&wkey;l6 — Evidence that female inmates of house are prostitutes as shown by prior conviction is admissible.
In disorderly house case, the state may show that the female inmates are prostitutes, to accused’s knowledge, and proof of such character of the inmates may be made by showing that the inmates or any of them have previously been charged and convicted of vagrancy as prostitutes.
2. Criminal law <&wkey;400(2) — 'Oral proof of conviction not best evidence.
■ In disorderly house case, on the issue of character as prostitutes of inmates of the house, testimony of a justice of the peace that two inmates of accused’s house had pleaded guilty to vagrancy as being common prostitutes in his court, the docket entries of the justice showing these facts not being admitted in evidence, was objectionable as oral testimony of record facts.
Appeal from Tarrant County Court at Law; P. W. Seward, Judge.
Mrs. R. A. Hardeman was convicted of keeping a bawdyliouse, and appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
¡Mays & Mays, F. M. Chaney, and Henry R. Bishop, all of Fort Worth, for appellant.
R. K. Hanger, Dist. Atty., and Robt. B. Young, ‘ Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., both of Fort Worth, and R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State..

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, J.
Appellant was convicted' in the county court at law of Tarrant county of keeping a bawdyhouse, and her punishment fixed at a fine of $200 and 20 days in the county jail.
There is complaint in appellant's brief of the manner of substitution of the information and complaint herein. There is no bill of exceptions relating to or presenting this matter, and we find nothing in the transcript from which we derive any information of the fact that there has been such substitution. In this. condition of the record it is manifest we cannot consider this complaint presented in the brief.
It appears that upon information the officers went to a rooming house in Fort Worth which was occupied by appellant. They asked ber in regard to the people in the house, and she told them that the oply occupants of her rooms at that time were two men. They proceeded to search the house, and found in a number of the rooms men in bed and in the rooms with women in various stages of undress. It was shown by sufficient testimony that a number of said women were prostitutes, and that they had been charged with vagrancy, to wit, being common prostitutes, and had paid fines therefor. Testimony of the fact that such women had the general reputation of being common prostitutes, and that they had been charged in court with vagrancy based upon their charac-. ter as prostitutes, and that they had been fined therefor, would seem to be admissible.
The evidence seems to us to amply support the conclusion of guilt, and, finding no error in the record, an affirmance is ordered.
For other eases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes