Court Opinion

ID: 9681290
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 07:47:25.437428+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:33.064651
License: Public Domain

ON appellant’s motion for rehearing.
BEAUCHAMP, Judge.
In the original presentation of this case we were impressed with the contention that complaint was being made to the court’s charge on the ground that it did not submit the issue of apparent danger. That question was thoroughly discussed with the correct conclusion.
As we understood the contention now presented, there is a further complaint that the charge given was too restrictive and reliance is had on Robidoux v. State, 116 Tex. Cr. R. 432, 34 S. W. 2d 863. Appellant says that the charge given in the instant case is almost identical with that given in the Robidoux case, for which a reversal was had.
The complained of section of the charge in the Robidoux case reads as follows:
“Now if you believe from the evidence, that the defendant, P. F. Robidoux, by striking and beating Wellits Moore with a blunt instrument, did kill the said Wellits Moore, and you further believe from the evidence that at the time of such killing, if any, the said Wellits Moore did make a pass or demonstration with a stick of wood that induced the defendant to believe, viewed by you from the defendant’s standpoint at the time, in the light of all the facts and circumstances in his, defendant’s knowledge, that he, the said Wellits Moore, was about to attack him, the defendant, * *
Very clearly it is held that the charge is too restrictive in that it made the self-defense dependent upon whether or not the deceased “did make a pass or demonstration with a stick of wood.” This was to be viewed from the jury’s standpoint. No such charge is given in the instant case. The jury is instructed to consider the attack “as viewed from the standpoint of the defendant at the time, taking into consideration all of the facts and circumstances as they reasonably appeared to him, the defendant at the time, producing in his mind * * * a rational fear or expectation of death or serious bodily injury at the hands of said Manuel del Toro * *
*466We have reconsidered the case in the light of the argument presented and are of the opinion that the correct conclusion was reached. The motion for rehearing is accordingly overruled.