Legal Opinion

Bennett v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided May 27, 1893No. 60PublishedCited by 13 opinions

It is unnecessary to recapitulate the evidence.

1Opinion of the Court

SIMKINS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the theft of cattle, and his punishment assessed at three years in the penitentiary.

This is the third appeal. It was reversed November 20,1890, because there was no charge on alibi (15 Southwestern Reporter, 405); it was again reversed November 14, 1891, because the charge on alibi was not sufficient (30 Texas Criminal Appeals, 342); and it is again before us.

1. Appellant complains that the court erred in permitting the witness Stokes to reproduce the testimony of P. F. Breeden, a deceased witness, who testified on a former trial. We think there is…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bishop v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Summons v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1856

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Pratt v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1908
  2. Egbert v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1915
  3. Wells v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1938
  4. Nite v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1899
  5. Spencer v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1911

8 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