Davis v. State

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Our statement in the original opinion that “the use of said language violated no law of this State,” was only made to meet the contention of appellant that to allow proof of the use of such language, was to allow proof of an extraneous offense. Nothing is legally an “offense’ except it offend against some statute. Appellant now urges that it was. hurtful to him, and therefore objectionable, because it was the introduction of evidence of a prior and disconnected contest, controversy and difficulty, and he cites Brown v. State, 112 S. W. Rep. 80; Vana v.…