« ПретходнаНастави »
connection with other instructions.-Kelley v., XIV. JUDGMENT, SENTENCE, AND State, 202 S. W. 49.
Oww 100! (Tex.Cr.App.) Under Vernon's Ann. (H) Requests for Instructions.
Code Cr. Proc. 1916, art. 865b, it is only CW829(1) (Ark.) Court need not give request- burglary of a private residence, and not bured instructions in homicide case that are fully glary of a storehouse, which prevents the imcovered by other instructions.-Kelley v. State, position of a suspended sentence.-Ditto v. 202 S. W. 49.
State, 202 S. W. 735. (1) Objections to Instructions or Refusal
XV. APPEAL AND ERROR, AND Thereof, and Exceptions.
CERTIORARI. Ein 844(1) (Ark.) Erroneous definition of lar- (A) Form of Remedy, Jurisdiction, and ceny, if error, held not amenable to general ob
Right of Review. jection.-Banks v. State, 202 S. W. 43.
1024 (9) (Ky.) In case of a misdemeanor
punishable by fine only, the commonwealth may (J) Custody, Conduct, and Deliberations appeal from an acquittal, and on a reversal of Jury.
have a new trial.-Commonwealth v. Gritten, 854 (9).(Ky.) There was no separation of 202 S. W. 884. jury, requiring reversal, where during temporary lull in murder trial juror left his seat (B) Presentation and Reservation in Low.
er Court of Grounds of Review. and approached a person to ask him to look after juror's horse, and, sheriff interrupting,
Om 1039 (Ark.) Where evidence of state's witthe juror returned to his seat.--Thomas v.
ness is read to jury after submission of case at Commonwealth, 202 S. W. 498.
request of jury, defendant cannot complain that
evidence of his witnesses on same point was (K) Verdict.
not read, where it was not requested.–Kelley
v. State, 202 S. W. 49. 878(2) (Mo.App.) Where both counts of an information or indictment relate to the same fully selling intoxicating liquors, error in com
Om 1054(1) (Ark.) In a prosecution for unlaw. transaction, a general verdict is sufficient.- pelling defendant to answer questions concernState v. Evertz, 202 S. W. 614. In a prosecution for treating a sick person be reviewed, in the absence of exceptions.
ing a plea of guilty in a federal court will not without a license, held, that both counts of the Cunningham v. State, 202 S. W. 27. information obviously related to one and the same transaction, and that a general verdict Challenged' entire dying declaration, most of
em 1059(2) (Tenn.) Where exception below was sufficient.-Id. 884 (Mo.App.) Where but one offense is part of declaration will be overruled on appeal.
which was competent, assignment of error as to charged in two separate counts in an information under a statute imposing a minimum fine
- Dickason v. State, 202 S. W. 922. for each offense, the jury is authorized to Em 1066 (Tex.Cr.App.) Although an order was assess but one penalty.--State v. Evertz, 202 entered authorizing the filing of statement of S. W. 614.
facts and bill of exceptions after court bad 889 (Ter.Cr.App.) Verdict finding defend taken on 'motion for new trial, exceptions to
adjourned, this would not apply to evidence ant guilty on first count of indictment, where which must be filed during term time.-Thompsuch count had not been submitted, held properly sent back for correction under Code Cr.
son v. State, 202 S. W. 91. Proc. 1911, arts. 773, 774, as informal verdict, (C) Proceedings for Transfer of Cause, by substitution of the word "second" for
and Effect Thereof. “first."-Barnes v. State, 202 S. W. 949.
Om 1083 (Tex.Cr.App.) Where accused on con
viction gave notice of appeal and recognizance XIII. MOTIONS FOR NEW TRIAL before he was sentenced, the court nevertheAND IN ARREST.
less had jurisdiction to set aside the recog. m915. (Tex.Cr.App.) Under Bill of Rights, & nizance and sentence accused and to require a 10. in view of section 29, an indictment, leaving new recognizance.-Ingram v. State, 202 S. W. out the words "by the" in the formal clause
741. "by the authority of the state," held fatally de- (D) Record and Proceedings Not in Recfective, so that court erred in not allowing amended, motion for new trial for alleged discovery that indictment had been amended by Shows no notice of appeal, the appeal will be
m 1087(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Where the
record inserting such omitted words.-Alvarado v. State, 202 S. W. 322.
dismissed.-Thompson v. State, 202 S. W. 91.
it Ewww938(1) (Ark.) Newly discovered evidence in m1087(2) (Tex.Cr. App.) Where appears prosecution for grand larceny held not to re
from the record on appeal that statement of quire new trial.- Banks v. State, 202 S. W. 43. facts and bill of exceptions were filed beyond cm 945(2) (Tex.Cr.App.) Where conviction of should be 'shown.-Thompson v. State, 202 S.
term time, an order of court for such filing burglary rested largely on finding tracks similar to those of accused at the scene of the
W. 91. burglary, and after conviction, a third person Emo 1087 (2) (Tex.Cr. App.) Bills of exceptions made affidavit that his house had been burglar- and statement of facts in misdemeanor case in ized and a similar track found while accused county court having no official stenographer was in jail, such testimony warranted new must be filed in term time or within 20 days trial on the ground of newly discovered evi- thereafter, and, if filed after adjournment, recdence.-Ditto v. State, 202 S. W. 735.
ord must show order duly entered extending ww949(3) (Tex.Cr.App.) The filing of
time within which filing might be made.-Lee v. amended motion for new trial is generally State, 202, S. W. 732. within the sound discretion of the trial court.
Omw 1090 (1) (Tex.Cr.App.) In the absence of -Alvarado v. State, 202 S. W. 322.
bill of exception and statement of facts, the 970(7) (Tex.Cr. App.) Failure of indictment only question raised is the sufficiency of the under Penal Code 1911, arts. 1421, 1422, for indictment.-Price v. State, 202 S. W. 948. swindling, to state the name of the particular 1090(7) (Tex.Cr.App.) In prosecution for person to whom the false representation was murder, refusal of continuance will not be remade, cannot be questioned after verdict, under viewed in absence of bill of exceptions.-Lewis Vernon's Ann, Code Cr. Proc. 1916, art. 849, v. State, 202 S. W. 86. as to motions in arrest of judgment.-Pruitt v. Om 1090(7) (Tex.Cr.App.) Overruling appli
where bill of exceptions was not reserved to Rev. St. 1909, $ 5313, on the mere ground of
court to prove bill was in fact signed.-State
w 1124(1) (Ky.) On appeal from a convic-
lationship, but presented the ground only by
statement in his motion, referring therein to
a part of the record.-Bonar v. Commonwealth,
202 S. W. 676.
sent with the record.-Williams v. State, 202
Om 1131(7) Tex.Cr. App.) Defects in transcript
of appeal may be cured and dismissed case re-
instated, where defects were omissions of the
county in which defendant was tried contrary
view of section 281,-Frasure 7. Common-
cm 1144(6) (Tex.Cr.App.) It will be presumed
of serious import upon the trial or unless con-
tested or verified in a bill of exceptions.-Sher-
man v. State, 202 S. W. 93.
peal that certain witnesses whose names were
it was discretionary to allow complaining wit-
condition depends on credibility of witnesses.
verse, unless there is manifest error.-Dicka-
Failure to file full transcript and pay docket Board of Council of City of Danville v. Com-
finding based on conflicting testimony will not , m 1171(1) (Ark.) In prosecution for unlaw-
ence of a police officer was that the law was
years of age, failure to give an instruction on
defendant's third appeal, need not be consid-
ered; no objection to indictment being pre-
(H) Determination and Disposition of
1186(4) (Tex.Cr.App.) In a prosecution for
selling liquors in dry territory. an instruction
to any one of the four named in the indictment,
was not ground for reversal,
S.. W. 948.
ment of guilty, reversal on appeal disposes of
See Landlord and Tenant, n332.
See Divorce, em 130.
tirely destroyed, but merely reduced from a
then living, the Legislature could pass such act
the curtesy consummate.-Hull v. Hull, 202 S.
though it may afterwards die, and death of the
although no agreement between them, nor pro- 1 bility Act is virtually compensation statute, and
less of negligence.-Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry.
wound under left eye, leaving scar, gashes and
plug in boiler, held not excessive.-Anderson
v. Lusk, 202 S. W. 304.
w 132(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) $6,500 was not ex-
cessive damages where arm was rendered use.
affected, and 48 days were spent in hospital.-
St. Louis, B. & M. Ry. Co. v. Webber, 202 S.
Om 132(8) (Tex.Civ.App.) Where servant was
and had his right hand and arm to elbow crush
Shelton, 202 S. W. 194.
amputation of foot and three subsequent am-
putations nearly up to knee became necessary,
held not excessive.-Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry.
Co. v. Hopkins, 202 S. W. 222.
about one-half, a verdict of $2,000 held not ex-
cessive.-Stewart Dry Goods Co. v. Boone, 202
em 148 (Mo.App.) In action for personal in-
juries governed by laws of sister state, ne-
cessity of pleading medical expenses is gov-
erned by lex fori, and in Missouri there can
be no recovery of such expenses, unless plead-
ed.-La Duke v. Dexter, 202 S. W. 254.
Om 158(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) Proof in personal
Texas Traction Co. v. Crouch, 202 S. W. 781.
juries, evidence of vaginal hemorrhage follow-
dence of disabling effects of menstruation, and
On 158(4) (Tex.Civ.App.) In action for dam-
ages sustained by minor while attempting to
car, statement by
minor, in describing how her injuries affected
it showed that father was in such condition as
(E) Damages, Forfeiture, or Fine.
cm 90 (Mo.App.) In action for wrongful death
of pedestrian struck by an electric car owing
to the motorman's failure to give warning or
to keep an adequate lookout, it was permis-
erroneous. Dickensheet v. Co., 202 S. W. 434.
91 (Tex.Civ.App.) That children have an
min, 202 S. W. 996.
v. Hill, 202 S. W. 358.
ww99(4) (Tex.Civ.App.) Damages awarded to
000 and $6,000, for wrongful death of their
(A) Right of Action and Defenses. Ry. Co. v. Benjamin, 202 S. W. 996.
excessive.-Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Hicks,
Om 103(3) (Tenn.) In an action for wrongful
death, evidence as to self-defense held to pre-
sent a question for the jury.--Hunt-Berlin Coal
Co. v. Paton, 202 S. W. 935.
or happenings were such as to lead a "prudent
though he were not, the law would not hold
fying the quoted words by the word "reason-
erroneous in using the word “necessarily.”—Id.
DEBTOR AND CREDITOR.
See Executors and Administrators.
274; Homicide, 203-221.