Legal Opinion

Basquez v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided May 26, 1909No. 3987PublishedCited by 26 opinions

The opinion states the case.

1Opinion of the Court

DAVIDSON, Peesiding Judge.

This conviction was for adultery, the punishment assessed being a fine of $100.

There is one bill of exceptions found in the record. This bill was reserved to the action of the court overruling motion for a new trial, and embodies the motion for a new trial. This does not add any strength to the grounds of the motion, and was not necessary. The motion for new trial contains four grounds, the first three of which criticise the court’s charge on circumstantial evidence. This conviction is for a misdemeanor. The rule in misdemeanor cases is, in order to have the charge…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Marshall v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1902
  2. Schoennerstedt v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1909
  3. Williams v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1902

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Giles v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
  2. Parroccini v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1921
  3. Golden v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
  4. Gowans v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
  5. Singleton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1947

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API