Word v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Appeal from tbe District Court of Anderson. Tried below before tbe Hon. John F. Prince. Appeal from a conviction of assault to murder; penalty, five years imprisonment in tbe penitentiary. Tbe opinion states tbe case. On question of insufficiency of tbe evidence : Hammons v. State, 29 Texas Crim. App., 445; Beyes v. State, 48 Texas Crim. Bep., 346. On question of other offenses: Welhausen v. State, 18 S. W. Bep., 300; Haney v. State, 57 Texas Crim.
Read the full summary
Appeal from tbe District Court of Anderson. Tried below before tbe Hon. John F. Prince. Appeal from a conviction of assault to murder; penalty, five years imprisonment in tbe penitentiary. Tbe opinion states tbe case. On question of insufficiency of tbe evidence : Hammons v. State, 29 Texas Crim. App., 445; Beyes v. State, 48 Texas Crim. Bep., 346. On question of other offenses: Welhausen v. State, 18 S. W. Bep., 300; Haney v. State, 57 Texas Crim. Bep., 156, 122 S. W. Bep., 34. On question of remarks by judge: Bradshaw v. State, 44 Texas Crim. Bep., 222; Kirk v. State, 35 id., 224.
1Opinion of the Court
HABPEB, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of assault to murder, ‘ and bis punishment assessed at five years confinement in tbe penitentiary.
Appellant contends tbat the court should have continued the cause for the following reasons: Appellant was in jail, and had two criminal charges against him. Appellant’s counsel ¡Jates that in a conversation with the court and the district attorney, the court had stated he would call the first numbered case for trial, and if appellant was acquitted in that case, and would make bond in the second case, it could be continued. The court says, that all that was…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Fielden v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1948