Chism v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the Court
DAVIDSON, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of gambling. The State’s case was circumstantial that appellant was engaged in gambling. This was positively denied by appellant in his testimony and other witnesses. In rebuttal the State introduced the witness Buck Williams, deputy sheriff, who had previously testified in the case, and by him proved as follows, as shown by bill of exceptions: “After we arrested the defendant, and the two Smiths for gaming, and while we were taking them to jail and after we had got about half a mile from where we arrested them, the defendant told me that he and the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Fernandez v. BetoDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1968
- Brown v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1925