Vaughan v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Houston. Tried below before Hon. J. H. Reagan. Indictment for an assault with intent to kill, &c. The portion of the charge relied on as error by the appellant is in the following words : “If Vaughan fought willingly he is a violator of the law, whether he made the first assault or not; that is, if his conduct and language were of an insulting and provoking character, such as is usually employed to excite the passions, or provoke a fight, he is guilty either of…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Houston. Tried below before Hon. J. H. Reagan. Indictment for an assault with intent to kill, &c. The portion of the charge relied on as error by the appellant is in the following words : “If Vaughan fought willingly he is a violator of the law, whether he made the first assault or not; that is, if his conduct and language were of an insulting and provoking character, such as is usually employed to excite the passions, or provoke a fight, he is guilty either of an assault with intent to murder, or of an aggravated, or a common assault and battery. One cannot provoke a diEeulty and…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The charge of the Court may be obnoxious to criticism in the matter complained of; but having reference to other parts of the charge, and the evidence in the case, especially the use of a deadly weapon when the necessity, (if it had existed,) by which it was sought to be justified, appears *753to have ceased ; on the whole, we see no cause to apprehend that the jury were misled by any supposed error in the charge. They were instructed in plain and unmistakable terms, that if the accused acted in his own necessary self defence, or to save himself from an impending assault, he was guiltless. If…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Bishop v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1875
- Cook v. WoottersTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- Franklin v. SmithTexas Commission of Appeals · 1880
- Beazley v. DensonTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- Boothe v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1878