Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 390
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
390 ANDERSON V. THE STATE. [Term of
Opinion of the Court.
TF. . Davidson, for appellant.
Geo. TW. Smith, for The State.
ROBERTS, C. J. The objection to the indictment is not tenable.
The only deficiency is in the omission of the defendant's
name at a place in which, had it been there inserted, it would
have been tautology.
The evidence fully sustains the charge in the indictment,
and there was no objection made to the charge of the court;
and, indeed, there is nothing in the charge where reference is
had to the facts in proof, which was prejudicial to the defendant.
There is no bill of exceptions in the record showing that
the overruling of the application for a continuance was excepted
to, nor does it appear in any way which will enable this
court to revise such ruling of the court below. It has been
repeatedly decided, that it should appear by a bill of excep-tions
that the action of the court in overruling the application
for a continuance was excepted to at the time, so that the
judge may give any explanation thereon which he may think
necessary to sustain his ruling. (Campion v. Angier, 16 Texas,
93; Parker v. McKelvain, 17 Texas, 159; Cotton v. The State,
32 Texas, 640, and numerous others down to 40 Texas, inclusive.)
There are bills of exceptions to the rulings of the court in
overruling the motion for a new trial, and the motion in arrest
of judgment, which are entirely unnecessary to be presented
in the shape of a bill of exceptions, when it appears as copied
from the minutes of the court, as it should in every transcript.
It does not even appear in this case that the application for a
continuance and for a habeas corpus ad testijfieandum were
presented to, and acted on by the court, except that it is made
a ground for a motion for a new trial. This court cannot take
such a ground as alleged to be true as therein stated by the
defendant, unless its truth is authenticated by the judge presiding,
in the shape of a bill of exceptions, showing that the
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/398/: accessed May 26, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .