Kemp v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Hamilton. Tried below before the Hon. J. P. Osterhout. Indictment for driving cattle from their accustomed range without the consent of the owner. The record does not disclose the character of the testimony which the District Attorney was permitted to introduce after the argument had begun. The facts on which the conviction was obtained are substantially stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtOgden, J.
Article 3046, Paschal’s Digest, provides that upon the trial of criminal cases, “ the court shall allow testimony to be introduced at any time before the argument of a cause is concluded, if it appear that it is necessary to the due administration of justice.” This statute was intended to give the District Court great discretion in the admission of testimony; and in order that justice may be administered in all cases, it has materially changed the rigid rule which had hitherto obtained, in regard to the admission of evidence. It is believed that the 'discretion thus confided to the District…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Peek v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2003
- Wisdom v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1901
- Garza v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Caddell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1905
- Mitchell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1958
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.