Legal Opinion

Coleman v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided May 1, 1929No. 12534Published

The opinion states the case.

1Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

— The motion is addressed to the criticism of the instruction given to the jury defining intoxicating liquor. In the evidence the liquid is described as home brew, and witnesses who drank some of it testified that it was intoxicating. Such evidence has been held competent on many occasions. See Joyce on Intoxicating Liquors, sec. 674; Terry v. State, 44 Tex. Crim. Rep. 411. Testimony was given describing the effect produced by drinking the liquid. This was also competent. Joyce on Intoxicating Liquor, sec. 674; Taylor v. State, 44 Tex. Crim.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Eubank v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1926
  2. Henson Pettigrew v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1926
  3. Briggs v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1926
  4. Scott v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API